Re: [PATCH 3/4] paravirt: add virt_spin_lock pvops function
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Date: 2017-09-05 14:10:37
On 09/05/2017 09:24 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
quoted hunk
There are cases where a guest tries to switch spinlocks to bare metal behavior (e.g. by setting "xen_nopvspin" boot parameter). Today this has the downside of falling back to unfair test and set scheme for qspinlocks due to virt_spin_lock() detecting the virtualized environment. Make virt_spin_lock() a paravirt operation in order to enable users to select an explicit behavior like bare metal. Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> --- arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h | 5 ++++ arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h | 1 + arch/x86/include/asm/qspinlock.h | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- arch/x86/kernel/paravirt-spinlocks.c | 14 ++++++++++ arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c | 2 ++ 5 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h index c25dd22f7c70..d9e954fb37df 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h@@ -725,6 +725,11 @@ static __always_inline bool pv_vcpu_is_preempted(long cpu) return PVOP_CALLEE1(bool, pv_lock_ops.vcpu_is_preempted, cpu); } +static __always_inline bool pv_virt_spin_lock(struct qspinlock *lock) +{ + return PVOP_CALLEE1(bool, pv_lock_ops.virt_spin_lock, lock); +} + #endif /* SMP && PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS */ #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h index 19efefc0e27e..928f5e7953a7 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h@@ -319,6 +319,7 @@ struct pv_lock_ops { void (*kick)(int cpu); struct paravirt_callee_save vcpu_is_preempted; + struct paravirt_callee_save virt_spin_lock; } __no_randomize_layout; /* This contains all the paravirt structures: we get a convenientdiff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/qspinlock.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/qspinlock.h index 48a706f641f2..fbd98896385c 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/qspinlock.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/qspinlock.h@@ -17,6 +17,25 @@ static inline void native_queued_spin_unlock(struct qspinlock *lock) smp_store_release((u8 *)lock, 0); } +static inline bool native_virt_spin_lock(struct qspinlock *lock) +{ + if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR)) + return false; + + /* + * On hypervisors without PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS support we fall + * back to a Test-and-Set spinlock, because fair locks have + * horrible lock 'holder' preemption issues. + */ + + do { + while (atomic_read(&lock->val) != 0) + cpu_relax(); + } while (atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->val, 0, _Q_LOCKED_VAL) != 0); + + return true; +} + #ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS extern void native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val); extern void __pv_init_lock_hash(void);@@ -38,33 +57,32 @@ static inline bool vcpu_is_preempted(long cpu) { return pv_vcpu_is_preempted(cpu); } + +void native_pv_lock_init(void) __init; #else static inline void queued_spin_unlock(struct qspinlock *lock) { native_queued_spin_unlock(lock); } + +static inline void native_pv_lock_init(void) +{ +} #endif #ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT #define virt_spin_lock virt_spin_lock +#ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS static inline bool virt_spin_lock(struct qspinlock *lock) { - if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR)) - return false;
Have you consider just add one more jump label here to skip virt_spin_lock when KVM or Xen want to do so?
quoted hunk
- - /* - * On hypervisors without PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS support we fall - * back to a Test-and-Set spinlock, because fair locks have - * horrible lock 'holder' preemption issues. - */ - - do { - while (atomic_read(&lock->val) != 0) - cpu_relax(); - } while (atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->val, 0, _Q_LOCKED_VAL) != 0); - - return true; + return pv_virt_spin_lock(lock); +} +#else +static inline bool virt_spin_lock(struct qspinlock *lock) +{ + return native_virt_spin_lock(lock); } +#endif /* CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS */ #endif /* CONFIG_PARAVIRT */ #include <asm-generic/qspinlock.h>diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/paravirt-spinlocks.c b/arch/x86/kernel/paravirt-spinlocks.c index 26e4bd92f309..1be187ef8a38 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/paravirt-spinlocks.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/paravirt-spinlocks.c@@ -20,6 +20,12 @@ bool pv_is_native_spin_unlock(void) __raw_callee_save___native_queued_spin_unlock; } +__visible bool __native_virt_spin_lock(struct qspinlock *lock) +{ + return native_virt_spin_lock(lock); +} +PV_CALLEE_SAVE_REGS_THUNK(__native_virt_spin_lock);
I have some concern about the overhead of register saving/restoring have on spin lock performance in case the kernel is under a non-KVM/Xen hypervisor. Cheers, Longman