Hi, On 2020/9/16 0:03, peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 05:51:50PM +0200, peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> Anyway, I'll rewrite the Changelog and stuff it in locking/urgent. > > How's this? > Thanks for that. > --- > Subject: locking/percpu-rwsem: Use this_cpu_{inc,dec}() for read_count > From: Hou Tao <houtao1@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 22:07:50 +0800 > > From: Hou Tao <houtao1@xxxxxxxxxx> > > The __this_cpu*() accessors are (in general) IRQ-unsafe which, given > that percpu-rwsem is a blocking primitive, should be just fine. > > However, file_end_write() is used from IRQ context and will cause > load-store issues. > > Fixing it by using the IRQ-safe this_cpu_*() for operations on > read_count. This will generate more expensive code on a number of > platforms, which might cause a performance regression for some of the > other percpu-rwsem users. > > If any such is reported, we can consider alternative solutions. > I have simply test the performance impact on both x86 and aarch64. There is no degradation under x86 (2 sockets, 18 core per sockets, 2 threads per core) v5.8.9 no writer, reader cn | 18 | 36 | 72 the rate of down_read/up_read per second | 231423957 | 230737381 | 109943028 the rate of down_read/up_read per second (patched) | 232864799 | 233555210 | 109768011 However the performance degradation is huge under aarch64 (4 sockets, 24 core per sockets): nearly 60% lost. v4.19.111 no writer, reader cn | 24 | 48 | 72 | 96 the rate of down_read/up_read per second | 166129572 | 166064100 | 165963448 | 165203565 the rate of down_read/up_read per second (patched) | 63863506 | 63842132 | 63757267 | 63514920 I will test the aarch64 host by using v5.8 tomorrow. Regards, Tao > Fixes: 70fe2f48152e ("aio: fix freeze protection of aio writes") > Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200915140750.137881-1-houtao1@xxxxxxxxxx > --- > include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h | 8 ++++---- > kernel/locking/percpu-rwsem.c | 4 ++-- > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > --- a/include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h > +++ b/include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h > @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ static inline void percpu_down_read(stru > * anything we did within this RCU-sched read-size critical section. > */ > if (likely(rcu_sync_is_idle(&sem->rss))) > - __this_cpu_inc(*sem->read_count); > + this_cpu_inc(*sem->read_count); > else > __percpu_down_read(sem, false); /* Unconditional memory barrier */ > /* > @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ static inline bool percpu_down_read_tryl > * Same as in percpu_down_read(). > */ > if (likely(rcu_sync_is_idle(&sem->rss))) > - __this_cpu_inc(*sem->read_count); > + this_cpu_inc(*sem->read_count); > else > ret = __percpu_down_read(sem, true); /* Unconditional memory barrier */ > preempt_enable(); > @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ static inline void percpu_up_read(struct > * Same as in percpu_down_read(). > */ > if (likely(rcu_sync_is_idle(&sem->rss))) { > - __this_cpu_dec(*sem->read_count); > + this_cpu_dec(*sem->read_count); > } else { > /* > * slowpath; reader will only ever wake a single blocked > @@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ static inline void percpu_up_read(struct > * aggregate zero, as that is the only time it matters) they > * will also see our critical section. > */ > - __this_cpu_dec(*sem->read_count); > + this_cpu_dec(*sem->read_count); > rcuwait_wake_up(&sem->writer); > } > preempt_enable(); > --- a/kernel/locking/percpu-rwsem.c > +++ b/kernel/locking/percpu-rwsem.c > @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(percpu_free_rwsem); > > static bool __percpu_down_read_trylock(struct percpu_rw_semaphore *sem) > { > - __this_cpu_inc(*sem->read_count); > + this_cpu_inc(*sem->read_count); > > /* > * Due to having preemption disabled the decrement happens on > @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ static bool __percpu_down_read_trylock(s > if (likely(!atomic_read_acquire(&sem->block))) > return true; > > - __this_cpu_dec(*sem->read_count); > + this_cpu_dec(*sem->read_count); > > /* Prod writer to re-evaluate readers_active_check() */ > rcuwait_wake_up(&sem->writer); > . >