Thread (13 messages) 13 messages, 2 authors, 2019-10-18

Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] locking/qspinlock: Introduce starvation avoidance into CNA

From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Date: 2019-10-18 16:09:33
Also in: linux-arch, lkml

On 10/16/19 12:29 AM, Alex Kogan wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Keep track of the number of intra-node lock handoffs, and force
inter-node handoff once this number reaches a preset threshold.

Signed-off-by: Alex Kogan <redacted>
Reviewed-by: Steve Sistare <redacted>
---
 kernel/locking/qspinlock.c     |  3 +++
 kernel/locking/qspinlock_cna.h | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
index 6d8c4a52e44e..1d0d884308ef 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
@@ -597,6 +597,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(queued_spin_lock_slowpath);
 #if !defined(_GEN_CNA_LOCK_SLOWPATH) && defined(CONFIG_NUMA_AWARE_SPINLOCKS)
 #define _GEN_CNA_LOCK_SLOWPATH
 
+#undef pv_init_node
+#define pv_init_node			cna_init_node
+
 #undef pv_wait_head_or_lock
 #define pv_wait_head_or_lock		cna_pre_scan
 
diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock_cna.h b/kernel/locking/qspinlock_cna.h
index 4d095f742d31..b92a6f9a19db 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/qspinlock_cna.h
+++ b/kernel/locking/qspinlock_cna.h
@@ -50,9 +50,19 @@ struct cna_node {
 	struct mcs_spinlock	mcs;
 	int			numa_node;
 	u32			encoded_tail;
-	u32			pre_scan_result; /* 0 or an encoded tail */
+	u32			pre_scan_result; /* 0, 1 or an encoded tail */
+	u32			intra_count;
 };
 
+/*
+ * Controls the threshold for the number of intra-node lock hand-offs. It can
+ * be tuned and depend, e.g., on the number of CPUs per node. For now,
+ * choose a value that provides reasonable long-term fairness without
+ * sacrificing performance compared to a version that does not have any
+ * fairness guarantees.
+ */
+#define INTRA_NODE_HANDOFF_THRESHOLD (1 << 16)
I think 64k is too high. I will be more comfortable with a number like
(1 << 8). The worst case latency for a lock waiter from the other node
is just not acceptable.

Cheers,
Longman


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help