WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86: improve scalability of rwlock implementation

To: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86: improve scalability of rwlock implementation
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 17:01:31 +0000
Delivery-date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 10:01:56 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>From an abstract perspective, it should be possible to replace normal
spin locks with the write version of rwlocks without correctness
issues. The implementation so far had a very small probability of not
scaling beyond 128 CPUs (which would become more significant if
aforementioned replacement was done), since the sign bit of a 32-bit
integer is being used to determine various conditions, and 129 or more
CPUs simultaneously subtracting RW_LOCK_BIAS from a single lock would
cause an undetected overflow.

Therefore, the bias gets adjusted so that it can cover up to 2048
CPUs, and the lock structure gets widened to account for the unlikely
case of getting built for and run on a system with even more CPUs.

While touching this code, I also used the same .subsection approach
that was already used elsewhere to eliminate taken branches from the
fast paths.

And the output constraints of the affected asm()-s got fixed to use
"+" rather than "=".

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>

--- a/xen/include/asm-x86/spinlock.h
+++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/spinlock.h
@@ -31,39 +31,67 @@ static always_inline int _raw_spin_trylo
     return (oldval > 0);
 }
 
-typedef struct {
+#if NR_CPUS <= 2048
+
+typedef union {
     volatile int lock;
+    volatile int write;
+} raw_rwlock_t;
+
+#define RW_LOCK_BIAS      0x00100000
+#define READ_LOCK_SUFFIX  "l"
+#define WRITE_LOCK_ADD(n) "addl %" #n ","
+#define WRITE_LOCK_SUB(n) "subl %" #n ","
+#define WRITE_LOCK_CMP(n) "%" #n
+
+#else
+
+typedef union {
+    volatile s64 lock;
+    struct {
+        volatile u32 read;
+        volatile s32 write;
+    };
 } raw_rwlock_t;
 
-#define RW_LOCK_BIAS 0x01000000
+#define RW_LOCK_BIAS      (1L << 32)
+#define READ_LOCK_SUFFIX  "q"
+#define WRITE_LOCK_ADD(n) "incl"
+#define WRITE_LOCK_SUB(n) "decl"
+#define WRITE_LOCK_CMP(n) "$1"
+
+#endif
+
 #define _RAW_RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED /*(raw_rwlock_t)*/ { RW_LOCK_BIAS }
 
 static always_inline void _raw_read_lock(raw_rwlock_t *rw)
 {
     asm volatile (
-        "1:  lock; decl %0         \n"
-        "    jns 3f                \n"
-        "    lock; incl %0         \n"
-        "2:  rep; nop              \n"
-        "    cmpl $1,%0            \n"
-        "    js 2b                 \n"
-        "    jmp 1b                \n"
-        "3:"
-        : "=m" (rw->lock) : : "memory" );
+        "1:  lock; dec" READ_LOCK_SUFFIX " %0\n"
+        "    js 3f                           \n"
+        "    .subsection 1                   \n"
+        "3:  lock; inc" READ_LOCK_SUFFIX " %0\n"
+        "2:  rep; nop                        \n"
+        "    cmp" READ_LOCK_SUFFIX " $1,%0   \n"
+        "    js 2b                           \n"
+        "    jmp 1b                          \n"
+        "    .subsection 0                   \n"
+        : "+m" (rw->lock) : : "memory" );
 }
 
 static always_inline void _raw_write_lock(raw_rwlock_t *rw)
 {
     asm volatile (
-        "1:  lock; subl %1,%0      \n"
-        "    jz 3f                 \n"
-        "    lock; addl %1,%0      \n"
-        "2:  rep; nop              \n"
-        "    cmpl %1,%0            \n"
-        "    jne 2b                \n"
-        "    jmp 1b                \n"
-        "3:"
-        : "=m" (rw->lock) : "i" (RW_LOCK_BIAS) : "memory" );
+        "1:  lock; " WRITE_LOCK_SUB(1) " %0\n"
+        "    jnz 3f                        \n"
+        "    .subsection 1                 \n"
+        "3:  lock; " WRITE_LOCK_ADD(1) " %0\n"
+        "2:  rep; nop                      \n"
+        "    cmpl " WRITE_LOCK_CMP(1) ", %0\n"
+        "    jne 2b                        \n"
+        "    jmp 1b                        \n"
+        "    .subsection 0                 \n"
+        : "+m" (rw->write) : "i" (RW_LOCK_BIAS) : "memory" );
 }
 
 static always_inline int _raw_write_trylock(raw_rwlock_t *rw)
@@ -71,12 +99,12 @@ static always_inline int _raw_write_tryl
     int rc;
 
     asm volatile (
-        "    lock; subl %2,%0      \n"
-        "    jz 1f                 \n"
-        "    lock; addl %2,%0      \n"
-        "    dec %1                \n"
+        "    lock; " WRITE_LOCK_SUB(2) " %0\n"
+        "    jz 1f                         \n"
+        "    lock; " WRITE_LOCK_ADD(2) " %0\n"
+        "    dec %1                        \n"
         "1:"
-        : "=m" (rw->lock), "=r" (rc) : "i" (RW_LOCK_BIAS), "1" (1)
+        : "+m" (rw->write), "=r" (rc) : "i" (RW_LOCK_BIAS), "1" (1)
         : "memory" );
 
     return rc;
@@ -85,18 +113,24 @@ static always_inline int _raw_write_tryl
 static always_inline void _raw_read_unlock(raw_rwlock_t *rw)
 {
     asm volatile (
-        "lock ; incl %0"
-        : "=m" ((rw)->lock) : : "memory" );
+        "    lock ; inc" READ_LOCK_SUFFIX " %0"
+        : "+m" (rw->lock) : : "memory" );
 }
 
 static always_inline void _raw_write_unlock(raw_rwlock_t *rw)
 {
     asm volatile (
-        "lock ; addl %1,%0"
-        : "=m" ((rw)->lock) : "i" (RW_LOCK_BIAS) : "memory" );
+        "    lock ; " WRITE_LOCK_ADD(1) " %0"
+        : "+m" (rw->write) : "i" (RW_LOCK_BIAS) : "memory" );
 }
 
 #define _raw_rw_is_locked(x) ((x)->lock < RW_LOCK_BIAS)
-#define _raw_rw_is_write_locked(x) ((x)->lock <= 0)
+#define _raw_rw_is_write_locked(x) ((x)->write <= 0)
+
+#undef READ_LOCK_SUFFIX
+#undef WRITE_LOCK_ADD
+#undef WRITE_LOCK_SUB
+#undef WRITE_LOCK_CMP
+
 
 #endif /* __ASM_SPINLOCK_H */


Attachment: x86-rwlock-scalability.patch
Description: Text document

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86: improve scalability of rwlock implementation, Jan Beulich <=