On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 15:14 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Davidlohr Bueso <davidl...@hp.com> wrote:
> >
> > - increment the counter at queue_lock() as we always end up calling
> >   queue_me() which adds the element to the list. Upon any error,
> >   queue_unlock() is called for housekeeping, for which we decrement
> >   to mach the increment done in queue_lock().
> >
> > - decrement the counter at __unqueue_me() to reflect when an element is
> >   removed from the queue for wakeup related purposes.
> 
> I still hate this whole separate counter thing. It seems really annoying.
> 
> If re-ordering things didn't work out, then why can't just the counter
> we *already* have in the spinlock itself work as the counter? Your
> counter update logic seems to basically match when you take the
> spinlock anyway.

So the following has passed all testing, just like the atomics variant.
Thoughts?

Thanks,
Davidlohr

diff --git a/kernel/futex.c b/kernel/futex.c
index fcc6850..c8c7ce5 100644
--- a/kernel/futex.c
+++ b/kernel/futex.c
@@ -73,19 +73,22 @@
  * Basic futex operation and ordering guarantees:
  *
  * The waiter reads the futex value in user space and calls
- * futex_wait(). This function computes the hash bucket and acquires
- * the hash bucket lock. After that it reads the futex user space value
- * again and verifies that the data has not changed. If it has not
- * changed it enqueues itself into the hash bucket, releases the hash
+ * futex_wait(). It computes the hash bucket and acquires the hash
+ * bucket lock. After that it reads the futex user space value again
+ * and verifies that the data has not changed. If it has not changed
+ * it enqueues itself into the hash bucket, releases the hash
  * bucket lock and schedules.
  *
  * The waker side modifies the user space value of the futex and calls
- * futex_wake(). This functions computes the hash bucket and acquires
- * the hash bucket lock. Then it looks for waiters on that futex in the
- * hash bucket and wakes them.
+ * futex_wake(). It computes the hash bucket and acquires the hash
+ * bucket lock. Then it looks for waiters on that futex in the hash
+ * bucket and wakes them.
  *
- * Note that the spin_lock serializes waiters and wakers, so that the
- * following scenario is avoided:
+ * In scenarios where wakeups are called and no tasks are blocked on a futex,
+ * taking the hb spinlock can be avoided and simply return. In order for this
+ * optimization to work, ordering guarantees must exist so that the waiter
+ * being added to the list is acknowledged when the list is concurrently being
+ * checked by the waker, avoiding scenarios like the following:
  *
  * CPU 0                               CPU 1
  * val = *futex;
@@ -106,24 +109,50 @@
  * This would cause the waiter on CPU 0 to wait forever because it
  * missed the transition of the user space value from val to newval
  * and the waker did not find the waiter in the hash bucket queue.
- * The spinlock serializes that:
+ *
+ * The correct serialization ensures that a waiter either observes
+ * the changed user space value before blocking or is woken by a
+ * concurrent waker:
  *
  * CPU 0                               CPU 1
  * val = *futex;
  * sys_futex(WAIT, futex, val);
  *   futex_wait(futex, val);
- *   lock(hash_bucket(futex));
- *   uval = *futex;
- *                                     *futex = newval;
- *                                     sys_futex(WAKE, futex);
- *                                       futex_wake(futex);
- *                                       lock(hash_bucket(futex));
+ *
+ *   waiters++;
+ *   mb(); (A) <-- paired with -.
+ *                              |
+ *   lock(hash_bucket(futex));  |
+ *                              |
+ *   uval = *futex;             |
+ *                              |        *futex = newval;
+ *                              |        sys_futex(WAKE, futex);
+ *                              |          futex_wake(futex);
+ *                              |
+ *                              `------->   mb(); (B)
  *   if (uval == val)
- *      queue();
+ *     queue();
  *     unlock(hash_bucket(futex));
- *     schedule();                       if (!queue_empty())
- *                                         wake_waiters(futex);
- *                                       unlock(hash_bucket(futex));
+ *     schedule();                         if (waiters)
+ *                                           lock(hash_bucket(futex));
+ *                                           wake_waiters(futex);
+ *                                           unlock(hash_bucket(futex));
+ *
+ * Where (A) orders the waiters increment and the futex value read -- this
+ * is guaranteed by the head counter in the hb spinlock; and where (B)
+ * orders the write to futex and the waiters read.
+ *
+ * This yields the following case (where X:=waiters, Y:=futex):
+ *
+ *     X = Y = 0
+ *
+ *     w[X]=1          w[Y]=1
+ *     MB              MB
+ *     r[Y]=y          r[X]=x
+ *
+ * Which guarantees that x==0 && y==0 is impossible; which translates back into
+ * the guarantee that we cannot both miss the futex variable change and the
+ * enqueue.
  */
 
 int __read_mostly futex_cmpxchg_enabled;
@@ -211,6 +240,35 @@ static unsigned long __read_mostly futex_hashsize;
 
 static struct futex_hash_bucket *futex_queues;
 
+static inline void futex_get_mm(union futex_key *key)
+{
+       atomic_inc(&key->private.mm->mm_count);
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+       /*
+        * Ensure futex_get_mm() implies a full barrier such that
+        * get_futex_key() implies a full barrier. This is relied upon
+        * as full barrier (B), see the ordering comment above.
+        */
+       smp_mb__after_atomic_inc();
+#endif
+}
+
+static inline bool hb_waiters_pending(struct futex_hash_bucket *hb)
+{
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
+       /*
+        * If the hash bucket is locked then we know the ticket counter
+        * is non-zero and thus there is at least one waiter in the queue.
+        */
+       if (spin_is_locked(&hb->lock))
+               return true;
+       smp_rmb(); /* Make sure we check the lock state first */
+       return !plist_head_empty(&hb->chain);
+#else
+       return true;
+#endif
+}
+
 /*
  * We hash on the keys returned from get_futex_key (see below).
  */
@@ -245,10 +303,10 @@ static void get_futex_key_refs(union futex_key *key)
 
        switch (key->both.offset & (FUT_OFF_INODE|FUT_OFF_MMSHARED)) {
        case FUT_OFF_INODE:
-               ihold(key->shared.inode);
+               ihold(key->shared.inode); /* implies MB (B) */
                break;
        case FUT_OFF_MMSHARED:
-               atomic_inc(&key->private.mm->mm_count);
+               futex_get_mm(key); /* implies MB (B) */
                break;
        }
 }
@@ -322,7 +380,7 @@ get_futex_key(u32 __user *uaddr, int fshared, union 
futex_key *key, int rw)
        if (!fshared) {
                key->private.mm = mm;
                key->private.address = address;
-               get_futex_key_refs(key);
+               get_futex_key_refs(key);  /* implies MB (B) */
                return 0;
        }
 
@@ -1052,6 +1110,11 @@ futex_wake(u32 __user *uaddr, unsigned int flags, int 
nr_wake, u32 bitset)
                goto out;
 
        hb = hash_futex(&key);
+
+       /* Make sure we really have tasks to wakeup */
+       if (!hb_waiters_pending(hb))
+               goto out_put_key;
+
        spin_lock(&hb->lock);
 
        plist_for_each_entry_safe(this, next, &hb->chain, list) {
@@ -1072,6 +1135,7 @@ futex_wake(u32 __user *uaddr, unsigned int flags, int 
nr_wake, u32 bitset)
        }
 
        spin_unlock(&hb->lock);
+out_put_key:
        put_futex_key(&key);
 out:
        return ret;
@@ -1535,7 +1599,7 @@ static inline struct futex_hash_bucket *queue_lock(struct 
futex_q *q)
        hb = hash_futex(&q->key);
        q->lock_ptr = &hb->lock;
 
-       spin_lock(&hb->lock);
+       spin_lock(&hb->lock); /* implies MB (A) */
        return hb;
 }
 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to