On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 11:35:07PM +0800, Pan Xinhui wrote:
> On 2016年04月20日 22:24, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 09:24:00PM +0800, Pan Xinhui wrote:
> > 
> >> +#define __XCHG_GEN(cmp, type, sfx, skip, v)                               
> >> \
> >> +static __always_inline unsigned long                                      
> >> \
> >> +__cmpxchg_u32##sfx(v unsigned int *p, unsigned long old,          \
> >> +                   unsigned long new);                            \
> >> +static __always_inline u32                                                
> >> \
> >> +__##cmp##xchg_##type##sfx(v void *ptr, u32 old, u32 new)          \
> >> +{                                                                 \
> >> +  int size = sizeof (type);                                       \
> >> +  int off = (unsigned long)ptr % sizeof(u32);                     \
> >> +  volatile u32 *p = ptr - off;                                    \
> >> +  int bitoff = BITOFF_CAL(size, off);                             \
> >> +  u32 bitmask = ((0x1 << size * BITS_PER_BYTE) - 1) << bitoff;    \
> >> +  u32 oldv, newv, tmp;                                            \
> >> +  u32 ret;                                                        \
> >> +  oldv = READ_ONCE(*p);                                           \
> >> +  do {                                                            \
> >> +          ret = (oldv & bitmask) >> bitoff;                       \
> >> +          if (skip && ret != old)                                 \
> >> +                  break;                                          \
> >> +          newv = (oldv & ~bitmask) | (new << bitoff);             \
> >> +          tmp = oldv;                                             \
> >> +          oldv = __cmpxchg_u32##sfx((v u32*)p, oldv, newv);       \
> >> +  } while (tmp != oldv);                                          \
> >> +  return ret;                                                     \
> >> +}
> > 
> > So for an LL/SC based arch using cmpxchg() like that is sub-optimal.
> > 
> > Why did you choose to write it entirely in C?
> > 
> yes, you are right. more load/store will be done in C code.
> However such xchg_u8/u16 is just used by qspinlock now. and I did not see any 
> performance regression.
> So just wrote in C, for simple. :)
> 
> Of course I have done xchg tests.
> we run code just like xchg((u8*)&v, j++); in several threads.
> and the result is,
> [  768.374264] use time[1550072]ns in xchg_u8_asm

How was xchg_u8_asm() implemented, using lbarx or using a 32bit ll/sc
loop with shifting and masking in it?

Regards,
Boqun

> [  768.377102] use time[2826802]ns in xchg_u8_c
> 
> I think this is because there is one more load in C.
> If possible, we can move such code in asm-generic/.
> 
> thanks
> xinhui
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Reply via email to