similar to: [PATCH] virtio: use smp_load_acquire/smp_store_release

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:29:03PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > +static inline __virtio16 virtio_load_acquire(bool weak_barriers, __virtio16 *p) > +{ > + if (!weak_barriers) { > + rmb(); > + return READ_ONCE(*p); > + } > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > + return smp_load_acquire(p); > +#else > + dma_rmb(); > + return READ_ONCE(*p); > +#endif > +} This too is

We need a full barrier after writing out event index, using smp_store_mb there seems better than open-coding. As usual, we need a wrapper to account for strong barriers/non smp. It's tempting to use this in vhost as well, for that, we'll need a variant of smp_store_mb that works on __user pointers. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> --- Seems to give a speedup

We need a full barrier after writing out event index, using smp_store_mb there seems better than open-coding. As usual, we need a wrapper to account for strong barriers/non smp. It's tempting to use this in vhost as well, for that, we'll need a variant of smp_store_mb that works on __user pointers. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> --- Seems to give a speedup

This is really trying to cleanup some virt code, as suggested by Peter, who said > You could of course go fix that instead of mutilating things into > sort-of functional state. This work is needed for virtio, so it's probably easiest to merge it through my tree - is this fine by everyone? Arnd, if you agree, could you ack this please? Note to arch maintainers: please don't

This is really trying to cleanup some virt code, as suggested by Peter, who said > You could of course go fix that instead of mutilating things into > sort-of functional state. This work is needed for virtio, so it's probably easiest to merge it through my tree - is this fine by everyone? Arnd, if you agree, could you ack this please? Note to arch maintainers: please don't

Changes since v1: - replaced my asm-generic patch with an equivalent patch already in tip - add wrappers with virt_ prefix for better code annotation, as suggested by David Miller - dropped XXX in patch names as this makes vger choke, Cc all relevant mailing lists on all patches (not personal email, as the list becomes too long then) I parked this in vhost tree for now, but the

Changes since v1: - replaced my asm-generic patch with an equivalent patch already in tip - add wrappers with virt_ prefix for better code annotation, as suggested by David Miller - dropped XXX in patch names as this makes vger choke, Cc all relevant mailing lists on all patches (not personal email, as the list becomes too long then) I parked this in vhost tree for now, but the

This change makes it so that instead of using smp_wmb/rmb which varies depending on the kernel configuration we can can use dma_wmb/rmb which for most architectures should be equal to or slightly more strict than smp_wmb/rmb. The advantage to this is that these barriers are available to uniprocessor builds as well so the performance should improve under such a configuration. Signed-off-by:

This change makes it so that instead of using smp_wmb/rmb which varies depending on the kernel configuration we can can use dma_wmb/rmb which for most architectures should be equal to or slightly more strict than smp_wmb/rmb. The advantage to this is that these barriers are available to uniprocessor builds as well so the performance should improve under such a configuration. Signed-off-by:

Changes since v2: - extended checkpatch tests for barriers, and added patches teaching it to warn about incorrect usage of barriers (__smp_xxx barriers are for use by asm-generic code only), should help prevent misuse by arch code to address comments by Russell King - patched more instances of xen to use virt_ barriers as suggested by Stefano Stabellini - implemented a 2 byte xchg on sh

Changes since v2: - extended checkpatch tests for barriers, and added patches teaching it to warn about incorrect usage of barriers (__smp_xxx barriers are for use by asm-generic code only), should help prevent misuse by arch code to address comments by Russell King - patched more instances of xen to use virt_ barriers as suggested by Stefano Stabellini - implemented a 2 byte xchg on sh

virtio is using barriers to order memory accesses, thus dma_wmb/rmb is a good match. Build-tested on x86: Before [mst at tuck linux]$ size drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.o text data bss dec hex filename 11392 820 0 12212 2fb4 drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.o After mst at tuck linux]$ size drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.o text data bss dec hex filename

virtio is using barriers to order memory accesses, thus dma_wmb/rmb is a good match. Build-tested on x86: Before [mst at tuck linux]$ size drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.o text data bss dec hex filename 11392 820 0 12212 2fb4 drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.o After mst at tuck linux]$ size drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.o text data bss dec hex filename

On 01/10/2016 06:18 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On mips dma_rmb, dma_wmb, smp_store_mb, read_barrier_depends, > smp_read_barrier_depends, smp_store_release and smp_load_acquire match > the asm-generic variants exactly. Drop the local definitions and pull in > asm-generic/barrier.h instead. > This statement doesn't fit MIPS barriers variations. Moreover, there is a reason

On 01/10/2016 06:18 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On mips dma_rmb, dma_wmb, smp_store_mb, read_barrier_depends, > smp_read_barrier_depends, smp_store_release and smp_load_acquire match > the asm-generic variants exactly. Drop the local definitions and pull in > asm-generic/barrier.h instead. > This statement doesn't fit MIPS barriers variations. Moreover, there is a reason

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 03:02:12PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 03:26:29PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > Note that virtio_mb() is weirdly inconsistent with virtio_[rw]mb() in > > > that they use dma_* ops for weak_barriers, while virtio_mb() uses > > > smp_mb(). > > > > It's a hack really. I think I'll clean it

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 03:02:12PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 03:26:29PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > Note that virtio_mb() is weirdly inconsistent with virtio_[rw]mb() in > > > that they use dma_* ops for weak_barriers, while virtio_mb() uses > > > smp_mb(). > > > > It's a hack really. I think I'll clean it

Hi Michael, On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 09:07:42PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > This defines __smp_xxx barriers for powerpc > for use by virtualization. > > smp_xxx barriers are removed as they are > defined correctly by asm-generic/barriers.h > > This reduces the amount of arch-specific boiler-plate code. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at

Hi Michael, On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 09:07:42PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > This defines __smp_xxx barriers for powerpc > for use by virtualization. > > smp_xxx barriers are removed as they are > defined correctly by asm-generic/barriers.h > > This reduces the amount of arch-specific boiler-plate code. > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:22:22PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:32:53PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > Seems to give a speedup on my box but I'm less sure about this one. E.g. as > > xchng faster than mfence on all/most intel CPUs? Anyone has an opinion? > > Would help if you Cc people who would actually know this :-) Good point. Glad