tmp_suning_uos_patched/lib/kernel_lock.c

134 lines
2.9 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

/*
* lib/kernel_lock.c
*
* This is the traditional BKL - big kernel lock. Largely
* relegated to obsolescence, but used by various less
* important (or lazy) subsystems.
*/
#include <linux/smp_lock.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/kallsyms.h>
#include <linux/semaphore.h>
/*
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
* The 'big kernel lock'
*
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
* This spinlock is taken and released recursively by lock_kernel()
* and unlock_kernel(). It is transparently dropped and reacquired
* over schedule(). It is used to protect legacy code that hasn't
* been migrated to a proper locking design yet.
*
* Don't use in new code.
*/
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
static __cacheline_aligned_in_smp DEFINE_SPINLOCK(kernel_flag);
/*
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
* Acquire/release the underlying lock from the scheduler.
*
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
* This is called with preemption disabled, and should
* return an error value if it cannot get the lock and
* TIF_NEED_RESCHED gets set.
*
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
* If it successfully gets the lock, it should increment
* the preemption count like any spinlock does.
*
* (This works on UP too - _raw_spin_trylock will never
* return false in that case)
*/
int __lockfunc __reacquire_kernel_lock(void)
{
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
while (!_raw_spin_trylock(&kernel_flag)) {
if (test_thread_flag(TIF_NEED_RESCHED))
return -EAGAIN;
cpu_relax();
}
preempt_disable();
return 0;
}
void __lockfunc __release_kernel_lock(void)
{
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
_raw_spin_unlock(&kernel_flag);
preempt_enable_no_resched();
}
/*
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
* These are the BKL spinlocks - we try to be polite about preemption.
* If SMP is not on (ie UP preemption), this all goes away because the
* _raw_spin_trylock() will always succeed.
*/
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT
static inline void __lock_kernel(void)
{
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
preempt_disable();
if (unlikely(!_raw_spin_trylock(&kernel_flag))) {
/*
* If preemption was disabled even before this
* was called, there's nothing we can be polite
* about - just spin.
*/
if (preempt_count() > 1) {
_raw_spin_lock(&kernel_flag);
return;
}
/*
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
* Otherwise, let's wait for the kernel lock
* with preemption enabled..
*/
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
do {
preempt_enable();
while (spin_is_locked(&kernel_flag))
cpu_relax();
preempt_disable();
} while (!_raw_spin_trylock(&kernel_flag));
}
}
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
#else
/*
* Non-preemption case - just get the spinlock
*/
static inline void __lock_kernel(void)
{
_raw_spin_lock(&kernel_flag);
}
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
#endif
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
static inline void __unlock_kernel(void)
{
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
/*
* the BKL is not covered by lockdep, so we open-code the
* unlocking sequence (and thus avoid the dep-chain ops):
*/
_raw_spin_unlock(&kernel_flag);
preempt_enable();
}
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
/*
* Getting the big kernel lock.
*
* This cannot happen asynchronously, so we only need to
* worry about other CPU's.
*/
void __lockfunc lock_kernel(void)
{
int depth = current->lock_depth+1;
if (likely(!depth))
__lock_kernel();
current->lock_depth = depth;
}
BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7 (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair. The latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a mess of scheduling. The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the previous commit 00b41ec2611dc98f87f30753ee00a53db648d662 'Revert "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that never had any issues like this. This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore hack which still left a couple percentage point regression. As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that respect. We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the plan for several years. These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in particular) and Alan holds out some hope: "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked." so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action. Tested-by: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-05-11 11:58:02 +08:00
void __lockfunc unlock_kernel(void)
{
BUG_ON(current->lock_depth < 0);
if (likely(--current->lock_depth < 0))
__unlock_kernel();
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(lock_kernel);
EXPORT_SYMBOL(unlock_kernel);