On Mon, Apr 01, 2019 at 11:06:53AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 11:20:04AM -0400, Alex Kogan wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/locking/mcs_spinlock.h b/kernel/locking/mcs_spinlock.h
> > index bc6d3244e1af..71ee4b64c5d4 100644
> > --- a/kernel/locking/mcs_spinlock.h
> > +++ b/kernel/locking/mcs_spinlock.h
> > @@ -17,8 +17,18 @@
> >
> > struct mcs_spinlock {
> > struct mcs_spinlock *next;
> > +#ifndef CONFIG_NUMA_AWARE_SPINLOCKS
> > int locked; /* 1 if lock acquired */
> > int count; /* nesting count, see qspinlock.c */
> > +#else /* CONFIG_NUMA_AWARE_SPINLOCKS */
> > + uintptr_t locked; /* 1 if lock acquired, 0 if not, other values */
> > + /* represent a pointer to the secondary queue head */
> > + u32 node_and_count; /* node id on which this thread is running */
> > + /* with two lower bits reserved for nesting */
> > + /* count, see qspinlock.c */
> > + u32 encoded_tail; /* encoding of this node as the main queue tail */
> > + struct mcs_spinlock *tail; /* points to the secondary queue tail */
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_NUMA_AWARE_SPINLOCKS */
> > };
>
> Please, have another look at the paravirt code, in particular at struct
> pv_node and its usage. This is horrible.
Thing is, this turns into a right mess when you also have PV spinlocks
on.
One thing we could maybe do is change locked and count to u8, then your
overlay structure could be something like:
struct mcs_spinlock {
struct mcs_spinlock *next;
u8 locked;
u8 count;
};
struct cna_node {
/* struct mcs_spinlock overlay */
struct mcs_spinlock *next;
u8 locked;
u8 count;
/* our CNA bits, consuming the slack and PV space */
u16 node;
u32 encoded_tail;
struct mcs_spinlock *head;
struct mcs_spinlock *tail;
};
Then you also don't need the first two patches.
