[PATCH v3 2/2] locking/rwsem: Optimize down_read_trylock()
Waiman Long
longman at redhat.com
Fri Feb 15 05:35:22 AEDT 2019
On 02/14/2019 01:02 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 11:33:33AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 03:32:12PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>>> Modify __down_read_trylock() to optimize for an unlocked rwsem and make
>>> it generate slightly better code.
>>>
>>> Before this patch, down_read_trylock:
>>>
>>> 0x0000000000000000 <+0>: callq 0x5 <down_read_trylock+5>
>>> 0x0000000000000005 <+5>: jmp 0x18 <down_read_trylock+24>
>>> 0x0000000000000007 <+7>: lea 0x1(%rdx),%rcx
>>> 0x000000000000000b <+11>: mov %rdx,%rax
>>> 0x000000000000000e <+14>: lock cmpxchg %rcx,(%rdi)
>>> 0x0000000000000013 <+19>: cmp %rax,%rdx
>>> 0x0000000000000016 <+22>: je 0x23 <down_read_trylock+35>
>>> 0x0000000000000018 <+24>: mov (%rdi),%rdx
>>> 0x000000000000001b <+27>: test %rdx,%rdx
>>> 0x000000000000001e <+30>: jns 0x7 <down_read_trylock+7>
>>> 0x0000000000000020 <+32>: xor %eax,%eax
>>> 0x0000000000000022 <+34>: retq
>>> 0x0000000000000023 <+35>: mov %gs:0x0,%rax
>>> 0x000000000000002c <+44>: or $0x3,%rax
>>> 0x0000000000000030 <+48>: mov %rax,0x20(%rdi)
>>> 0x0000000000000034 <+52>: mov $0x1,%eax
>>> 0x0000000000000039 <+57>: retq
>>>
>>> After patch, down_read_trylock:
>>>
>>> 0x0000000000000000 <+0>: callq 0x5 <down_read_trylock+5>
>>> 0x0000000000000005 <+5>: xor %eax,%eax
>>> 0x0000000000000007 <+7>: lea 0x1(%rax),%rdx
>>> 0x000000000000000b <+11>: lock cmpxchg %rdx,(%rdi)
>>> 0x0000000000000010 <+16>: jne 0x29 <down_read_trylock+41>
>>> 0x0000000000000012 <+18>: mov %gs:0x0,%rax
>>> 0x000000000000001b <+27>: or $0x3,%rax
>>> 0x000000000000001f <+31>: mov %rax,0x20(%rdi)
>>> 0x0000000000000023 <+35>: mov $0x1,%eax
>>> 0x0000000000000028 <+40>: retq
>>> 0x0000000000000029 <+41>: test %rax,%rax
>>> 0x000000000000002c <+44>: jns 0x7 <down_read_trylock+7>
>>> 0x000000000000002e <+46>: xor %eax,%eax
>>> 0x0000000000000030 <+48>: retq
>>>
>>> By using a rwsem microbenchmark, the down_read_trylock() rate (with a
>>> load of 10 to lengthen the lock critical section) on a x86-64 system
>>> before and after the patch were:
>>>
>>> Before Patch After Patch
>>> # of Threads rlock rlock
>>> ------------ ----- -----
>>> 1 14,496 14,716
>>> 2 8,644 8,453
>>> 4 6,799 6,983
>>> 8 5,664 7,190
>>>
>>> On a ARM64 system, the performance results were:
>>>
>>> Before Patch After Patch
>>> # of Threads rlock rlock
>>> ------------ ----- -----
>>> 1 23,676 24,488
>>> 2 7,697 9,502
>>> 4 4,945 3,440
>>> 8 2,641 1,603
>> Urgh, yes LL/SC is the obvious exception that can actually do better
>> here :/
>>
>> Will, what say you?
> What machine were these numbers generated on and is it using LL/SC or LSE
> atomics for arm64? If you stick the microbenchmark somewhere, I can go play
> with a broader variety of h/w.
>
> Will
The machine is a 2-socket Cavium ThunderX2 99xx system with 64 cores and
256 threads. I was just using threads from the first socket for this
test. The microbenchmark that I used is attached. I used the command
"./run-locktest -ltryrwsem -r100 -i-10 -c10 -n<threads>" to generate the
locking rates.
The lscpu flags were:
fp asimd evtstrm aes pmull sha1 sha2 crc32 atomics cpuid asimdrdm
Cheers,
Longman
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: locktest.tar.gz
Type: application/gzip
Size: 9620 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/attachments/20190214/e6b518c7/attachment-0001.gz>
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list