lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Oct]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v12 09/11] pvqspinlock, x86: Add para-virtualization support
On 10/27/2014 02:02 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 01:38:20PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 10/24/2014 04:54 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 02:10:38PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>
>>>> Since enabling paravirt spinlock will disable unlock function inlining,
>>>> a jump label can be added to the unlock function without adding patch
>>>> sites all over the kernel.
>>> But you don't have to. My patches allowed for the inline to remain,
>>> again reducing the overhead of enabling PV spinlocks while running on a
>>> real machine.
>>>
>>> Look at:
>>>
>>> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140615130154.213923590@chello.nl
>>>
>>> In particular this hunk:
>>>
>>> Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/paravirt_patch_64.c
>>> ===================================================================
>>> --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/kernel/paravirt_patch_64.c
>>> +++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/paravirt_patch_64.c
>>> @@ -22,6 +22,10 @@ DEF_NATIVE(pv_cpu_ops, swapgs, "swapgs")
>>> DEF_NATIVE(, mov32, "mov %edi, %eax");
>>> DEF_NATIVE(, mov64, "mov %rdi, %rax");
>>>
>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS)&& defined(CONFIG_QUEUE_SPINLOCK)
>>> +DEF_NATIVE(pv_lock_ops, queue_unlock, "movb $0, (%rdi)");
>>> +#endif
>>> +
>>> unsigned paravirt_patch_ident_32(void *insnbuf, unsigned len)
>>> {
>>> return paravirt_patch_insns(insnbuf, len,
>>> @@ -61,6 +65,9 @@ unsigned native_patch(u8 type, u16 clobb
>>> PATCH_SITE(pv_cpu_ops, clts);
>>> PATCH_SITE(pv_mmu_ops, flush_tlb_single);
>>> PATCH_SITE(pv_cpu_ops, wbinvd);
>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS)&& defined(CONFIG_QUEUE_SPINLOCK)
>>> + PATCH_SITE(pv_lock_ops, queue_unlock);
>>> +#endif
>>>
>>> patch_site:
>>> ret = paravirt_patch_insns(ibuf, len, start, end);
>>>
>>>
>>> That makes sure to overwrite the callee-saved call to the
>>> pv_lock_ops::queue_unlock with the immediate asm "movb $0, (%rdi)".
>>>
>>>
>>> Therefore you can retain the inlined unlock with hardly (there might be
>>> some NOP padding) any overhead at all. On PV it reverts to a callee
>>> saved function call.
>> My concern is that spin_unlock() can be called in many places, including
>> loadable kernel modules. Can the paravirt_patch_ident_32() function able to
>> patch all of them in reasonable time? How about a kernel module loaded later
>> at run time?
> It has too. When the modules are loaded the .paravirt symbols are exposed
> and the module loader patches that.
>
> And during bootup time (before modules are loaded) it also patches everything
> - when it only runs on one CPU.
>> So I think we may still need to disable unlock function inlining even if we
>> used your way kernel site patching.
> No need. Inline should (And is) working just fine.
>> Regards,
>> Longman

Thanks for letting me know about the paravirt patching capability
available in the kernel. In this case, I would say we should use Peter's
way of doing unlock without disabling unlock function inlining. That
will further reduce the performance difference of kernels with and
without PV.

Cheer,
Longman


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-10-27 22:41    [W:0.127 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site