On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 01:05:24PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-07-12 at 09:30 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > OK, counter-flip RCU actually survives a pair of overnight runs on
> > CONFIG_PREEMPT running on 4-CPU machines, and also survives five
> > kernbenches and an LTP on another 4-CPU machine. (Overnight-run script
> > later in this message, FWIW.)
> >
> > So, time to get serious about a bit of code cleanup:
> >
> > o The heavyweight atomic operations in rcu_read_lock() and
> > rcu_read_unlock() are not needed in UP kernels, since
> > interrupts are disabled.
> >
> > Is there already something like smp_atomic_inc() and
> > smp_atomic_dec() that generate atomic_inc()/atomic_dec() in
> > SMP kernels, but ++/-- in UP kernels? If not, any reasons
> > not to add them, for example, as follows?
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > #define smp_atomic_inc(v) atomic_inc(v)
> > #define smp_atomic_dec(v) atomic_dec(v)
> > #else /* #ifdef CONFIG_SMP */
> > #define smp_atomic_inc(v) ((v)++)
> > #define smp_atomic_dec(v) ((v)++)
> > #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_SMP */
>
> What's the problem with atomic_inc? At least on x86, atomic inc is
> defined as:
>
> static __inline__ void atomic_inc(atomic_t *v)
> {
> __asm__ __volatile__(
> LOCK "incl %0"
> :"=m" (v->counter)
> :"m" (v->counter));
> }
>
> With LOCK defined as:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> #define LOCK "lock ; "
> #else
> #define LOCK ""
> #endif
>
> So is there a difference on UP between x.counter++ and atomic_inc(&x)?
On x86, you are right. The full list of architectures that are atomic
only in SMP are i386 (as you noted), parisc, sparc, and x86_64.
The architectures that appear to always be atomic are: alpha, ia64, m32r
(but unfamiliar with this one), mips, ppc, ppc64, s390 (I think...),
and sparc64. Most of these architectures need to disable interrupts
to provide "universal" atomic_inc() semantics in UP kernels, due to
their RISC-style atomic instructions.
The following architectures avoid the issue entirely by refusing to
support SMP: arm, arm26, cris, frv, h8300, m68k, m68knommu, sh, sh64,
and v850. Many of them disable interrupts in their atomic_inc()
implementations.
The advantage of smp_atomic_inc() is that architectures could dispense
with interrupt disabling. The disadvantage is that it is yet another
contribution to Linux's combinatorial explosion of primitives.
For the moment, I will grit my teeth and keep atomic_inc() and atomic_dec().
Other thoughts?
> > Since interrupts must be disabled for these to be safe,
> > my guess is that I should define them locally in rcupdate.c.
> > If there turns out to be a general need for them, they can
> > be moved somewhere more public.
> >
> > Objections?
> >
> > o In order to get things to work in both CONFIG_PREEMPT and
> > CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT, I ended up using the following:
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> >
> > #define rcu_spinlock_t _raw_spinlock_t
> > #define rcu_spin_lock(l, f) _raw_spin_lock(l)
> > #define rcu_spin_trylock(l, f) _raw_spin_trylock(l)
> > #define rcu_spin_unlock(l, f) _raw_spin_unlock(l)
> > #define RCU_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED RAW_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED
> >
> > #else /* #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT */
> >
> > #define rcu_spinlock_t spinlock_t
> > #define rcu_spin_lock(l, f) spin_lock_irqsave(l, f)
> > #define rcu_spin_trylock(l, f) spin_trylock_irqsave(l, f)
> > #define rcu_spin_unlock(l, f) spin_unlock_irqrestore(l, f)
> > #define RCU_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED
> >
> > #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT */
> >
> > Then using rcu_spin_lock() &c everywhere. The problem is
> > that (as near as I can tell) the only way to prevent interrupts
> > from running on the current CPU in CONFIG_PREEMPT kernels is
> > to use the _irq spinlock primitives, but _raw_spin_lock() does
> > the job in CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT (since interrupts are run in process
> > context, right). I could use _irq in both, but that would
> > unnecessarily degrade interrupt latency in CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT.
>
> Yep interrupts are threads in CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT. I guess you could also
> just use local_irq_save with spin_lock, since now local_irq_save no
> longer disables interrupts in PREEMPT_RT.
By this you mean the following?
local_irq_save(flags);
_raw_spin_lock(&mylock);
/* critical section */
_raw_spin_unlock(&mylock);
local_irq_restore(flags);
Thanx, Paul
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
