[PATCH v2] powerpc ticket locks
Torsten Duwe
duwe at lst.de
Sat Feb 8 04:55:05 EST 2014
On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 06:12:24PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 05:58:01PM +0100, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> > +static __always_inline void arch_spin_lock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> > {
> > + register struct __raw_tickets old, tmp,
> > + inc = { .tail = TICKET_LOCK_INC };
> > +
> > CLEAR_IO_SYNC;
> > + __asm__ __volatile__(
> > +"1: lwarx %0,0,%4 # arch_spin_lock\n"
> > +" add %1,%3,%0\n"
> > + PPC405_ERR77(0, "%4")
> > +" stwcx. %1,0,%4\n"
> > +" bne- 1b"
> > + : "=&r" (old), "=&r" (tmp), "+m" (lock->tickets)
> > + : "r" (inc), "r" (&lock->tickets)
> > + : "cc");
> > +
> > + if (likely(old.head == old.tail))
> > + goto out;
>
> I would have expected an lwsync someplace hereabouts.
Let me reconsider this. The v1 code worked on an 8 core,
maybe I didn't beat it enough.
> > static inline void arch_spin_unlock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
> > {
> > + arch_spinlock_t old, new;
> > +
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_PPC_SPLPAR)
> > + lock->holder = 0;
> > +#endif
> > + do {
> > + old.tickets = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->tickets);
> > + new.tickets.head = old.tickets.head + TICKET_LOCK_INC;
> > + new.tickets.tail = old.tickets.tail;
> > + } while (unlikely(__arch_spin_cmpxchg_eq(lock,
> > + old.head_tail,
> > + new.head_tail)));
> > SYNC_IO;
> > __asm__ __volatile__("# arch_spin_unlock\n\t"
> > PPC_RELEASE_BARRIER: : :"memory");
>
> Doens't your cmpxchg_eq not already imply a lwsync?
Right.
> > - lock->slock = 0;
> > }
>
> I'm still failing to see why you need an ll/sc pair for unlock.
Like so:
static inline void arch_spin_unlock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
{
arch_spinlock_t tmp;
#if defined(CONFIG_PPC_SPLPAR)
lock->holder = 0;
#endif
tmp.tickets = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->tickets);
tmp.tickets.head += TICKET_LOCK_INC;
lock->tickets.head = tmp.tickets.head;
SYNC_IO;
__asm__ __volatile__("# arch_spin_unlock\n\t"
PPC_RELEASE_BARRIER: : :"memory");
}
?
I'll wrap it all up next week. I only wanted to post an updated v2
with the agreed-upon changes for BenH.
Thanks so far!
Torsten
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list