Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v12 09/11] pvqspinlock, x86: Add para-virtualization support

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 01:38:20PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 10/24/2014 04:54 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 02:10:38PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> >
> >>Since enabling paravirt spinlock will disable unlock function inlining,
> >>a jump label can be added to the unlock function without adding patch
> >>sites all over the kernel.
> >But you don't have to. My patches allowed for the inline to remain,
> >again reducing the overhead of enabling PV spinlocks while running on a
> >real machine.
> >
> >Look at:
> >
> >   http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140615130154.213923590@xxxxxxxxx
> >
> >In particular this hunk:
> >
> >Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/paravirt_patch_64.c
> >===================================================================
> >--- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/kernel/paravirt_patch_64.c
> >+++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/paravirt_patch_64.c
> >@@ -22,6 +22,10 @@ DEF_NATIVE(pv_cpu_ops, swapgs, "swapgs")
> >  DEF_NATIVE(, mov32, "mov %edi, %eax");
> >  DEF_NATIVE(, mov64, "mov %rdi, %rax");
> >
> >+#if defined(CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS)&&  defined(CONFIG_QUEUE_SPINLOCK)
> >+DEF_NATIVE(pv_lock_ops, queue_unlock, "movb $0, (%rdi)");
> >+#endif
> >+
> >  unsigned paravirt_patch_ident_32(void *insnbuf, unsigned len)
> >  {
> >         return paravirt_patch_insns(insnbuf, len,
> >@@ -61,6 +65,9 @@ unsigned native_patch(u8 type, u16 clobb
> >                 PATCH_SITE(pv_cpu_ops, clts);
> >                 PATCH_SITE(pv_mmu_ops, flush_tlb_single);
> >                 PATCH_SITE(pv_cpu_ops, wbinvd);
> >+#if defined(CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS)&&  defined(CONFIG_QUEUE_SPINLOCK)
> >+               PATCH_SITE(pv_lock_ops, queue_unlock);
> >+#endif
> >
> >         patch_site:
> >                 ret = paravirt_patch_insns(ibuf, len, start, end);
> >
> >
> >That makes sure to overwrite the callee-saved call to the
> >pv_lock_ops::queue_unlock with the immediate asm "movb $0, (%rdi)".
> >
> >
> >Therefore you can retain the inlined unlock with hardly (there might be
> >some NOP padding) any overhead at all. On PV it reverts to a callee
> >saved function call.
> 
> My concern is that spin_unlock() can be called in many places, including
> loadable kernel modules. Can the paravirt_patch_ident_32() function able to
> patch all of them in reasonable time? How about a kernel module loaded later
> at run time?

It has too. When the modules are loaded the .paravirt symbols are exposed
and the module loader patches that.

And during bootup time (before modules are loaded) it also patches everything
- when it only runs on one CPU.
> 
> So I think we may still need to disable unlock function inlining even if we
> used your way kernel site patching.

No need. Inline should (And is) working just fine.
> 
> Regards,
> Longman

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel