DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gavin Hu <gavin.hu@arm.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org
Cc: nd@arm.com, thomas@monjalon.net, jerinj@marvell.com,
	hemant.agrawal@nxp.com, nipun.gupta@nxp.com,
	Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com, gavin.hu@arm.com,
	i.maximets@samsung.com, chaozhu@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	stable@dpdk.org
Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 3/3] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins
Date: Fri,  8 Mar 2019 15:56:37 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1552031797-146710-4-git-send-email-gavin.hu@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1552031797-146710-1-git-send-email-gavin.hu@arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20181220104246.5590-1-gavin.hu@arm.com>

The __sync builtin based implementation generates full memory barriers
('dmb ish') on Arm platforms. Using C11 atomic builtins to generate one way
barriers.

Here is the assembly code of __sync_compare_and_swap builtin.
__sync_bool_compare_and_swap(dst, exp, src);
   0x000000000090f1b0 <+16>:    e0 07 40 f9 ldr x0, [sp, #8]
   0x000000000090f1b4 <+20>:    e1 0f 40 79 ldrh    w1, [sp, #6]
   0x000000000090f1b8 <+24>:    e2 0b 40 79 ldrh    w2, [sp, #4]
   0x000000000090f1bc <+28>:    21 3c 00 12 and w1, w1, #0xffff
   0x000000000090f1c0 <+32>:    03 7c 5f 48 ldxrh   w3, [x0]
   0x000000000090f1c4 <+36>:    7f 00 01 6b cmp w3, w1
   0x000000000090f1c8 <+40>:    61 00 00 54 b.ne    0x90f1d4
<rte_atomic16_cmpset+52>  // b.any
   0x000000000090f1cc <+44>:    02 fc 04 48 stlxrh  w4, w2, [x0]
   0x000000000090f1d0 <+48>:    84 ff ff 35 cbnz    w4, 0x90f1c0
<rte_atomic16_cmpset+32>
   0x000000000090f1d4 <+52>:    bf 3b 03 d5 dmb ish
   0x000000000090f1d8 <+56>:    e0 17 9f 1a cset    w0, eq  // eq = none

The benchmarking results showed constant improvements on all available
platforms:
1. Cavium ThunderX2: 126% performance;
2. Hisilicon 1616: 30%;
3. Qualcomm Falkor: 13%;
4. Marvell ARMADA 8040 with A72 cores on macchiatobin: 3.7%

Here is the example test result on TX2:
$sudo ./build/app/test -l 16-27 -- i
RTE>>spinlock_autotest

*** spinlock_autotest without this patch ***
Test with lock on 12 cores...
Core [16] Cost Time = 53886 us
Core [17] Cost Time = 53605 us
Core [18] Cost Time = 53163 us
Core [19] Cost Time = 49419 us
Core [20] Cost Time = 34317 us
Core [21] Cost Time = 53408 us
Core [22] Cost Time = 53970 us
Core [23] Cost Time = 53930 us
Core [24] Cost Time = 53283 us
Core [25] Cost Time = 51504 us
Core [26] Cost Time = 50718 us
Core [27] Cost Time = 51730 us
Total Cost Time = 612933 us

*** spinlock_autotest with this patch ***
Test with lock on 12 cores...
Core [16] Cost Time = 18808 us
Core [17] Cost Time = 29497 us
Core [18] Cost Time = 29132 us
Core [19] Cost Time = 26150 us
Core [20] Cost Time = 21892 us
Core [21] Cost Time = 24377 us
Core [22] Cost Time = 27211 us
Core [23] Cost Time = 11070 us
Core [24] Cost Time = 29802 us
Core [25] Cost Time = 15793 us
Core [26] Cost Time = 7474 us
Core [27] Cost Time = 29550 us
Total Cost Time = 270756 us

In the tests on ThunderX2, with more cores contending, the performance gain
was even higher, indicating the __atomic implementation scales up better
than __sync.

Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release")
Cc: stable@dpdk.org

Signed-off-by: Gavin Hu <gavin.hu@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Phil Yang <phil.yang@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Ola Liljedahl <Ola.Liljedahl@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Steve Capper <Steve.Capper@arm.com>
---
 lib/librte_eal/common/include/generic/rte_spinlock.h | 18 +++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/generic/rte_spinlock.h b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/generic/rte_spinlock.h
index c4c3fc3..87ae7a4 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/generic/rte_spinlock.h
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/generic/rte_spinlock.h
@@ -61,9 +61,14 @@ rte_spinlock_lock(rte_spinlock_t *sl);
 static inline void
 rte_spinlock_lock(rte_spinlock_t *sl)
 {
-	while (__sync_lock_test_and_set(&sl->locked, 1))
-		while(sl->locked)
+	int exp = 0;
+
+	while (!__atomic_compare_exchange_n(&sl->locked, &exp, 1, 0,
+				__ATOMIC_ACQUIRE, __ATOMIC_RELAXED)) {
+		while (__atomic_load_n(&sl->locked, __ATOMIC_RELAXED))
 			rte_pause();
+		exp = 0;
+	}
 }
 #endif
 
@@ -80,7 +85,7 @@ rte_spinlock_unlock (rte_spinlock_t *sl);
 static inline void
 rte_spinlock_unlock (rte_spinlock_t *sl)
 {
-	__sync_lock_release(&sl->locked);
+	__atomic_store_n(&sl->locked, 0, __ATOMIC_RELEASE);
 }
 #endif
 
@@ -99,7 +104,10 @@ rte_spinlock_trylock (rte_spinlock_t *sl);
 static inline int
 rte_spinlock_trylock (rte_spinlock_t *sl)
 {
-	return __sync_lock_test_and_set(&sl->locked,1) == 0;
+	int exp = 0;
+	return __atomic_compare_exchange_n(&sl->locked, &exp, 1,
+				0, /* disallow spurious failure */
+				__ATOMIC_ACQUIRE, __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
 }
 #endif
 
@@ -113,7 +121,7 @@ rte_spinlock_trylock (rte_spinlock_t *sl)
  */
 static inline int rte_spinlock_is_locked (rte_spinlock_t *sl)
 {
-	return sl->locked;
+	return __atomic_load_n(&sl->locked, __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE);
 }
 
 /**
-- 
2.7.4

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-03-08  7:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-20 10:42 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 0/5] spinlock optimization and test case enhancements Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 10:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 1/5] test/spinlock: remove 1us delay for correct spinlock benchmarking Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 10:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 2/5] test/spinlock: get timestamp more precisely Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 10:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 3/5] test/spinlock: amortize the cost of getting time Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 10:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 4/5] spinlock: move the implementation to arm specific file Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 12:47   ` David Marchand
2018-12-20 12:55     ` David Marchand
2018-12-20 14:40       ` Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)
2018-12-20 14:36     ` Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)
2018-12-20 15:09       ` David Marchand
2018-12-20 15:58         ` Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)
2018-12-20 15:59           ` David Marchand
2018-12-20 10:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 5/5] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 17:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/5] spinlock optimization and test case enhancements Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 17:42   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/5] test/spinlock: remove 1us delay for correct benchmarking Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 17:42   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/5] test/spinlock: get timestamp more precisely Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 17:42   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/5] test/spinlock: amortize the cost of getting time Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 17:42   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/5] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins Gavin Hu
2018-12-20 17:42   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/5] eal: fix clang compilation error on x86 Gavin Hu
2019-01-15  7:54 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/4] spinlock optimization and test case enhancements gavin hu
2019-01-15  7:54 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] eal: fix clang compilation error on x86 gavin hu
2019-01-15  7:54 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/4] test/spinlock: remove 1us delay for correct benchmarking gavin hu
2019-01-15  7:54 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/4] test/spinlock: amortize the cost of getting time gavin hu
2019-01-15  7:54 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/4] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins gavin hu
2019-01-15 10:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/4] spinlock optimization and test case enhancements gavin hu
2019-01-15 10:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/4] eal: fix clang compilation error on x86 gavin hu
2019-01-15 17:42   ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-01-15 10:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/4] test/spinlock: remove 1us delay for correct benchmarking gavin hu
2019-01-15 10:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/4] test/spinlock: amortize the cost of getting time gavin hu
2019-01-15 10:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/4] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins gavin hu
2019-03-08  7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/3] generic spinlock optimization and test case enhancements Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/3] test/spinlock: dealy 1 us to create contention Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/3] test/spinlock: amortize the cost of getting time Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 3/3] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:37 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/3] generic spinlock optimization and test case enhancements Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:37 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/3] test/spinlock: remove 1us delay for correct benchmarking Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:37 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 2/3] test/spinlock: amortize the cost of getting time Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:37 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/3] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 0/3] generic spinlock optimization and test case enhancements Gavin Hu
2019-03-11 12:21   ` Nipun Gupta
2019-03-15 12:21   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-03-15 12:21     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2019-03-28  7:47   ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-28  7:47     ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-08  7:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 1/3] test/spinlock: remove 1us delay for correct benchmarking Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/3] test/spinlock: amortize the cost of getting time Gavin Hu
2019-03-08  7:56 ` Gavin Hu [this message]
2019-03-12 14:53   ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] [PATCH v8 3/3] spinlock: reimplement with atomic one-way barrier builtins Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
2019-03-14  0:31     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-03-14  0:31       ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2019-03-14  2:36       ` Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)
2019-03-14  2:36         ` Gavin Hu (Arm Technology China)
2019-03-14 14:22   ` Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
2019-03-14 14:22     ` Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran

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=1552031797-146710-4-git-send-email-gavin.hu@arm.com \
    --to=gavin.hu@arm.com \
    --cc=Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=chaozhu@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
    --cc=i.maximets@samsung.com \
    --cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
    --cc=nd@arm.com \
    --cc=nipun.gupta@nxp.com \
    --cc=stable@dpdk.org \
    --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).