From: "Carrillo, Erik G" <erik.g.carrillo@intel.com>
To: Phil Yang <phil.yang@arm.com>,
"rsanford@akamai.com" <rsanford@akamai.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "david.marchand@redhat.com" <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
"Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>,
"thomas@monjalon.net" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
"jerinj@marvell.com" <jerinj@marvell.com>,
"hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>,
"Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com" <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>,
"gavin.hu@arm.com" <gavin.hu@arm.com>, "nd@arm.com" <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] lib/timer: relax barrier for status update
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2020 21:10:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <SA0PR11MB4656BE7ABFD897F7168C5CA3B9C00@SA0PR11MB4656.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1582526539-14360-2-git-send-email-phil.yang@arm.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Yang <phil.yang@arm.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2020 12:42 AM
> To: rsanford@akamai.com; Carrillo, Erik G <erik.g.carrillo@intel.com>;
> dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: david.marchand@redhat.com; Burakov, Anatoly
> <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>; thomas@monjalon.net; jerinj@marvell.com;
> hemant.agrawal@nxp.com; Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com;
> gavin.hu@arm.com; phil.yang@arm.com; nd@arm.com
> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] lib/timer: relax barrier for status update
>
> Volatile has no ordering semantics. The rte_timer structure defines timer
> status as a volatile variable and uses the rte_r/wmb barrier to guarantee
> inter-thread visibility.
>
> This patch optimized the volatile operation with c11 atomic operations and
> one-way barrier to save the performance penalty. According to the
> timer_perf_autotest benchmarking results, this patch can uplift 10%~16%
> timer appending performance, 3%~20% timer resetting performance and
> 45% timer callbacks scheduling performance on aarch64 and no loss in
> performance for x86.
>
> Suggested-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Phil Yang <phil.yang@arm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu <gavin.hu@arm.com>
Hi Phil,
It seems like the consensus is to generally avoid replacing rte_atomic_* interfaces with the GCC builtins directly. In other areas of DPDK that are being patched, are the <std_atomic.h> C11 APIs going to be investigated? It seems like that decision will apply here as well.
Thanks,
Erik
> ---
> lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c | 90 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> ---------
> lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.h | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c index
> 269e921..be0262d 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.c
> @@ -10,7 +10,6 @@
> #include <assert.h>
> #include <sys/queue.h>
>
> -#include <rte_atomic.h>
> #include <rte_common.h>
> #include <rte_cycles.h>
> #include <rte_eal_memconfig.h>
> @@ -218,7 +217,7 @@ rte_timer_init(struct rte_timer *tim)
>
> status.state = RTE_TIMER_STOP;
> status.owner = RTE_TIMER_NO_OWNER;
> - tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
> + __atomic_store_n(&tim->status.u32, status.u32,
> __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -239,9 +238,9 @@ timer_set_config_state(struct rte_timer *tim,
>
> /* wait that the timer is in correct status before update,
> * and mark it as being configured */
> - while (success == 0) {
> - prev_status.u32 = tim->status.u32;
> + prev_status.u32 = __atomic_load_n(&tim->status.u32,
> __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
>
> + while (success == 0) {
> /* timer is running on another core
> * or ready to run on local core, exit
> */
> @@ -258,9 +257,20 @@ timer_set_config_state(struct rte_timer *tim,
> * mark it atomically as being configured */
> status.state = RTE_TIMER_CONFIG;
> status.owner = (int16_t)lcore_id;
> - success = rte_atomic32_cmpset(&tim->status.u32,
> - prev_status.u32,
> - status.u32);
> + /* If status is observed as RTE_TIMER_CONFIG earlier,
> + * that's not going to cause any issues because the
> + * pattern is read for status then read the other members.
> + * In one of the callers to timer_set_config_state
> + * (the __rte_timer_reset) we set other members to the
> + * structure (period, expire, f, arg) we want these
> + * changes to be observed after our change to status.
> + * So we need __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE here.
> + */
> + success = __atomic_compare_exchange_n(&tim-
> >status.u32,
> + &prev_status.u32,
> + status.u32, 0,
> + __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE,
> + __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> }
>
> ret_prev_status->u32 = prev_status.u32; @@ -279,20 +289,27 @@
> timer_set_running_state(struct rte_timer *tim)
>
> /* wait that the timer is in correct status before update,
> * and mark it as running */
> - while (success == 0) {
> - prev_status.u32 = tim->status.u32;
> + prev_status.u32 = __atomic_load_n(&tim->status.u32,
> __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
>
> + while (success == 0) {
> /* timer is not pending anymore */
> if (prev_status.state != RTE_TIMER_PENDING)
> return -1;
>
> /* here, we know that timer is stopped or pending,
> - * mark it atomically as being configured */
> + * mark it atomically as being running
> + */
> status.state = RTE_TIMER_RUNNING;
> status.owner = (int16_t)lcore_id;
> - success = rte_atomic32_cmpset(&tim->status.u32,
> - prev_status.u32,
> - status.u32);
> + /* RUNNING states are acting as locked states. If the
> + * timer is in RUNNING state, the state cannot be changed
> + * by other threads. So, we should use ACQUIRE here.
> + */
> + success = __atomic_compare_exchange_n(&tim-
> >status.u32,
> + &prev_status.u32,
> + status.u32, 0,
> + __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE,
> + __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> }
>
> return 0;
> @@ -520,10 +537,12 @@ __rte_timer_reset(struct rte_timer *tim, uint64_t
> expire,
>
> /* update state: as we are in CONFIG state, only us can modify
> * the state so we don't need to use cmpset() here */
> - rte_wmb();
> status.state = RTE_TIMER_PENDING;
> status.owner = (int16_t)tim_lcore;
> - tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
> + /* The "RELEASE" ordering guarantees the memory operations above
> + * the status update are observed before the update by all threads
> + */
> + __atomic_store_n(&tim->status.u32, status.u32,
> __ATOMIC_RELEASE);
>
> if (tim_lcore != lcore_id || !local_is_locked)
> rte_spinlock_unlock(&priv_timer[tim_lcore].list_lock);
> @@ -600,10 +619,12 @@ __rte_timer_stop(struct rte_timer *tim, int
> local_is_locked,
> }
>
> /* mark timer as stopped */
> - rte_wmb();
> status.state = RTE_TIMER_STOP;
> status.owner = RTE_TIMER_NO_OWNER;
> - tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
> + /* The "RELEASE" ordering guarantees the memory operations above
> + * the status update are observed before the update by all threads
> + */
> + __atomic_store_n(&tim->status.u32, status.u32,
> __ATOMIC_RELEASE);
>
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -637,7 +658,8 @@ rte_timer_stop_sync(struct rte_timer *tim) int
> rte_timer_pending(struct rte_timer *tim) {
> - return tim->status.state == RTE_TIMER_PENDING;
> + return __atomic_load_n(&tim->status.state,
> + __ATOMIC_RELAXED) ==
> RTE_TIMER_PENDING;
> }
>
> /* must be called periodically, run all timer that expired */ @@ -739,8
> +761,12 @@ __rte_timer_manage(struct rte_timer_data *timer_data)
> /* remove from done list and mark timer as stopped
> */
> status.state = RTE_TIMER_STOP;
> status.owner = RTE_TIMER_NO_OWNER;
> - rte_wmb();
> - tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
> + /* The "RELEASE" ordering guarantees the memory
> + * operations above the status update are observed
> + * before the update by all threads
> + */
> + __atomic_store_n(&tim->status.u32, status.u32,
> + __ATOMIC_RELEASE);
> }
> else {
> /* keep it in list and mark timer as pending */ @@ -
> 748,8 +774,12 @@ __rte_timer_manage(struct rte_timer_data *timer_data)
> status.state = RTE_TIMER_PENDING;
> __TIMER_STAT_ADD(priv_timer, pending, 1);
> status.owner = (int16_t)lcore_id;
> - rte_wmb();
> - tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
> + /* The "RELEASE" ordering guarantees the memory
> + * operations above the status update are observed
> + * before the update by all threads
> + */
> + __atomic_store_n(&tim->status.u32, status.u32,
> + __ATOMIC_RELEASE);
> __rte_timer_reset(tim, tim->expire + tim->period,
> tim->period, lcore_id, tim->f, tim->arg, 1,
> timer_data);
> @@ -919,8 +949,12 @@ rte_timer_alt_manage(uint32_t timer_data_id,
> /* remove from done list and mark timer as stopped
> */
> status.state = RTE_TIMER_STOP;
> status.owner = RTE_TIMER_NO_OWNER;
> - rte_wmb();
> - tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
> + /* The "RELEASE" ordering guarantees the memory
> + * operations above the status update are observed
> + * before the update by all threads
> + */
> + __atomic_store_n(&tim->status.u32, status.u32,
> + __ATOMIC_RELEASE);
> } else {
> /* keep it in list and mark timer as pending */
> rte_spinlock_lock(
> @@ -928,8 +962,12 @@ rte_timer_alt_manage(uint32_t timer_data_id,
> status.state = RTE_TIMER_PENDING;
> __TIMER_STAT_ADD(data->priv_timer, pending, 1);
> status.owner = (int16_t)this_lcore;
> - rte_wmb();
> - tim->status.u32 = status.u32;
> + /* The "RELEASE" ordering guarantees the memory
> + * operations above the status update are observed
> + * before the update by all threads
> + */
> + __atomic_store_n(&tim->status.u32, status.u32,
> + __ATOMIC_RELEASE);
> __rte_timer_reset(tim, tim->expire + tim->period,
> tim->period, this_lcore, tim->f, tim->arg, 1,
> data);
> diff --git a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.h b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.h index
> c6b3d45..df533fa 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_timer/rte_timer.h
> @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ struct rte_timer
> {
> uint64_t expire; /**< Time when timer expire. */
> struct rte_timer *sl_next[MAX_SKIPLIST_DEPTH];
> - volatile union rte_timer_status status; /**< Status of timer. */
> + union rte_timer_status status; /**< Status of timer. */
> uint64_t period; /**< Period of timer (0 if not periodic). */
> rte_timer_cb_t f; /**< Callback function. */
> void *arg; /**< Argument to callback function. */
> --
> 2.7.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-08 21:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-24 6:42 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] lib/timer: protect timer subsystem initialized with lock Phil Yang
2020-02-24 6:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] lib/timer: relax barrier for status update Phil Yang
2020-04-08 10:23 ` Phil Yang
2020-04-08 21:10 ` Carrillo, Erik G [this message]
2020-04-08 21:16 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-08 21:26 ` Carrillo, Erik G
2020-04-08 21:56 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-09 19:29 ` Carrillo, Erik G
2020-04-10 4:39 ` Phil Yang
2020-04-20 16:05 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Phil Yang
2020-04-23 20:06 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-24 1:26 ` Carrillo, Erik G
2020-04-24 7:27 ` Phil Yang
2020-04-24 7:24 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Phil Yang
2020-04-25 17:17 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-04-26 7:36 ` Phil Yang
2020-04-26 12:18 ` Carrillo, Erik G
2020-04-26 14:20 ` Phil Yang
2020-04-26 19:30 ` Carrillo, Erik G
2020-04-26 14:45 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] " Phil Yang
2020-04-26 20:06 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-04-25 14:36 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Thomas Monjalon
2020-04-25 15:51 ` Phil Yang
2020-04-25 16:07 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-02-25 22:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] lib/timer: protect timer subsystem initialized with lock Carrillo, Erik G
2020-04-25 17:21 ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] " Thomas Monjalon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=SA0PR11MB4656BE7ABFD897F7168C5CA3B9C00@SA0PR11MB4656.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
--to=erik.g.carrillo@intel.com \
--cc=Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com \
--cc=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=gavin.hu@arm.com \
--cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
--cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
--cc=nd@arm.com \
--cc=phil.yang@arm.com \
--cc=rsanford@akamai.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).