Re: [PATCH 1/2] brw_mutex: big read-write mutex

From: Mikulas Patocka
Date: Thu Oct 25 2012 - 10:09:49 EST




On Wed, 24 Oct 2012, Dave Chinner wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 06:54:41PM -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 19 Oct 2012, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > > Yes, I tried this approach - it involves doing LOCK instruction on read
> > > > lock, remembering the cpu and doing another LOCK instruction on read
> > > > unlock (which will hopefully be on the same CPU, so no cacheline bouncing
> > > > happens in the common case). It was slower than the approach without any
> > > > LOCK instructions (43.3 seconds seconds for the implementation with
> > > > per-cpu LOCKed access, 42.7 seconds for this implementation without atomic
> > > > instruction; the benchmark involved doing 512-byte direct-io reads and
> > > > writes on a ramdisk with 8 processes on 8-core machine).
> > >
> > > So why is that a problem? Surely that's already tons better then what
> > > you've currently got.
> >
> > Percpu rw-semaphores do not improve performance at all. I put them there
> > to avoid performance regression, not to improve performance.
> >
> > All Linux kernels have a race condition - when you change block size of a
> > block device and you read or write the device at the same time, a crash
> > may happen. This bug is there since ever. Recently, this bug started to
> > cause major trouble - multiple high profile business sites report crashes
> > because of this race condition.
> >
> > You can fix this race by using a read lock around I/O paths and write lock
> > around block size changing, but normal rw semaphore cause cache line
> > bouncing when taken for read by multiple processors and I/O performance
> > degradation because of it is measurable.
>
> This doesn't sound like a new problem. Hasn't this global access,
> single modifier exclusion problem been solved before in the VFS?
> e.g. mnt_want_write()/mnt_make_readonly()
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.

Yes, mnt_want_write()/mnt_make_readonly() do the same thing as percpu rw
semaphores. I think you can convert mnt_want_write()/mnt_make_readonly()
to use percpu rw semaphores and remove the duplicated code.

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