Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 19:05:49 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 19:05:48 -0500 Received: from air-2.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:36236 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 19:04:42 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] (8/8) Kill brlock From: Stephen Hemminger To: Linus Torvalds , David Miller Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-net@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Open Source Devlopment Lab Message-Id: <1047428123.15872.113.camel@dell_ss3.pdx.osdl.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 Date: 11 Mar 2003 16:15:23 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 9918 Lines: 353 Previous patches killed all remaining uses of brlock so bye. diff -urN -X dontdiff linux-2.5.64/include/linux/brlock.h linux-2.5-nobrlock/include/linux/brlock.h --- linux-2.5.64/include/linux/brlock.h 2003-03-11 09:08:00.000000000 -0800 +++ linux-2.5-nobrlock/include/linux/brlock.h 1969-12-31 16:00:00.000000000 -0800 @@ -1,222 +0,0 @@ -#ifndef __LINUX_BRLOCK_H -#define __LINUX_BRLOCK_H - -/* - * 'Big Reader' read-write spinlocks. - * - * super-fast read/write locks, with write-side penalty. The point - * is to have a per-CPU read/write lock. Readers lock their CPU-local - * readlock, writers must lock all locks to get write access. These - * CPU-read-write locks are semantically identical to normal rwlocks. - * Memory usage is higher as well. (NR_CPUS*L1_CACHE_BYTES bytes) - * - * The most important feature is that these spinlocks do not cause - * cacheline ping-pong in the 'most readonly data' case. - * - * Copyright 2000, Ingo Molnar - * - * Registry idea and naming [ crutial! :-) ] by: - * - * David S. Miller - * - * David has an implementation that doesn't use atomic operations in - * the read branch via memory ordering tricks - i guess we need to - * split this up into a per-arch thing? The atomicity issue is a - * secondary item in profiles, at least on x86 platforms. - * - * The atomic op version overhead is indeed a big deal on - * load-locked/store-conditional cpus (ALPHA/MIPS/PPC) and - * compare-and-swap cpus (Sparc64). So we control which - * implementation to use with a __BRLOCK_USE_ATOMICS define. -DaveM - * - */ - -/* Register bigreader lock indices here. */ -enum brlock_indices { - BR_NETPROTO_LOCK, - __BR_END -}; - -#include - -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP - -#include -#include - -#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__ia64__) || defined(__x86_64__) -#define __BRLOCK_USE_ATOMICS -#else -#undef __BRLOCK_USE_ATOMICS -#endif - -#ifdef __BRLOCK_USE_ATOMICS -typedef rwlock_t brlock_read_lock_t; -#else -typedef unsigned int brlock_read_lock_t; -#endif - -/* - * align last allocated index to the next cacheline: - */ -#define __BR_IDX_MAX \ - (((sizeof(brlock_read_lock_t)*__BR_END + SMP_CACHE_BYTES-1) & ~(SMP_CACHE_BYTES-1)) / sizeof(brlock_read_lock_t)) - -extern brlock_read_lock_t __brlock_array[NR_CPUS][__BR_IDX_MAX]; - -#ifndef __BRLOCK_USE_ATOMICS -struct br_wrlock { - spinlock_t lock; -} __attribute__ ((__aligned__(SMP_CACHE_BYTES))); - -extern struct br_wrlock __br_write_locks[__BR_IDX_MAX]; -#endif - -extern void __br_lock_usage_bug (void); - -#ifdef __BRLOCK_USE_ATOMICS - -static inline void br_read_lock (enum brlock_indices idx) -{ - /* - * This causes a link-time bug message if an - * invalid index is used: - */ - if (idx >= __BR_END) - __br_lock_usage_bug(); - - preempt_disable(); - _raw_read_lock(&__brlock_array[smp_processor_id()][idx]); -} - -static inline void br_read_unlock (enum brlock_indices idx) -{ - if (idx >= __BR_END) - __br_lock_usage_bug(); - - read_unlock(&__brlock_array[smp_processor_id()][idx]); -} - -#else /* ! __BRLOCK_USE_ATOMICS */ -static inline void br_read_lock (enum brlock_indices idx) -{ - unsigned int *ctr; - spinlock_t *lock; - - /* - * This causes a link-time bug message if an - * invalid index is used: - */ - if (idx >= __BR_END) - __br_lock_usage_bug(); - - preempt_disable(); - ctr = &__brlock_array[smp_processor_id()][idx]; - lock = &__br_write_locks[idx].lock; -again: - (*ctr)++; - mb(); - if (spin_is_locked(lock)) { - (*ctr)--; - wmb(); /* - * The release of the ctr must become visible - * to the other cpus eventually thus wmb(), - * we don't care if spin_is_locked is reordered - * before the releasing of the ctr. - * However IMHO this wmb() is superflous even in theory. - * It would not be superflous only if on the - * other CPUs doing a ldl_l instead of an ldl - * would make a difference and I don't think this is - * the case. - * I'd like to clarify this issue further - * but for now this is a slow path so adding the - * wmb() will keep us on the safe side. - */ - while (spin_is_locked(lock)) - barrier(); - goto again; - } -} - -static inline void br_read_unlock (enum brlock_indices idx) -{ - unsigned int *ctr; - - if (idx >= __BR_END) - __br_lock_usage_bug(); - - ctr = &__brlock_array[smp_processor_id()][idx]; - - wmb(); - (*ctr)--; - preempt_enable(); -} -#endif /* __BRLOCK_USE_ATOMICS */ - -/* write path not inlined - it's rare and larger */ - -extern void FASTCALL(__br_write_lock (enum brlock_indices idx)); -extern void FASTCALL(__br_write_unlock (enum brlock_indices idx)); - -static inline void br_write_lock (enum brlock_indices idx) -{ - if (idx >= __BR_END) - __br_lock_usage_bug(); - __br_write_lock(idx); -} - -static inline void br_write_unlock (enum brlock_indices idx) -{ - if (idx >= __BR_END) - __br_lock_usage_bug(); - __br_write_unlock(idx); -} - -#else -# define br_read_lock(idx) ({ (void)(idx); preempt_disable(); }) -# define br_read_unlock(idx) ({ (void)(idx); preempt_enable(); }) -# define br_write_lock(idx) ({ (void)(idx); preempt_disable(); }) -# define br_write_unlock(idx) ({ (void)(idx); preempt_enable(); }) -#endif /* CONFIG_SMP */ - -/* - * Now enumerate all of the possible sw/hw IRQ protected - * versions of the interfaces. - */ -#define br_read_lock_irqsave(idx, flags) \ - do { local_irq_save(flags); br_read_lock(idx); } while (0) - -#define br_read_lock_irq(idx) \ - do { local_irq_disable(); br_read_lock(idx); } while (0) - -#define br_read_lock_bh(idx) \ - do { local_bh_disable(); br_read_lock(idx); } while (0) - -#define br_write_lock_irqsave(idx, flags) \ - do { local_irq_save(flags); br_write_lock(idx); } while (0) - -#define br_write_lock_irq(idx) \ - do { local_irq_disable(); br_write_lock(idx); } while (0) - -#define br_write_lock_bh(idx) \ - do { local_bh_disable(); br_write_lock(idx); } while (0) - -#define br_read_unlock_irqrestore(idx, flags) \ - do { br_read_unlock(irx); local_irq_restore(flags); } while (0) - -#define br_read_unlock_irq(idx) \ - do { br_read_unlock(idx); local_irq_enable(); } while (0) - -#define br_read_unlock_bh(idx) \ - do { br_read_unlock(idx); local_bh_enable(); } while (0) - -#define br_write_unlock_irqrestore(idx, flags) \ - do { br_write_unlock(irx); local_irq_restore(flags); } while (0) - -#define br_write_unlock_irq(idx) \ - do { br_write_unlock(idx); local_irq_enable(); } while (0) - -#define br_write_unlock_bh(idx) \ - do { br_write_unlock(idx); local_bh_enable(); } while (0) - -#endif /* __LINUX_BRLOCK_H */ diff -urN -X dontdiff linux-2.5.64/kernel/ksyms.c linux-2.5-nobrlock/kernel/ksyms.c --- linux-2.5.64/kernel/ksyms.c 2003-03-11 09:08:01.000000000 -0800 +++ linux-2.5-nobrlock/kernel/ksyms.c 2003-03-10 15:50:15.000000000 -0800 @@ -40,7 +40,6 @@ #include #include #include -#include #include #include #include @@ -433,17 +432,6 @@ #endif EXPORT_SYMBOL(mod_timer); -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP - -/* Big-Reader lock implementation */ -EXPORT_SYMBOL(__brlock_array); -#ifndef __BRLOCK_USE_ATOMICS -EXPORT_SYMBOL(__br_write_locks); -#endif -EXPORT_SYMBOL(__br_write_lock); -EXPORT_SYMBOL(__br_write_unlock); -#endif - #ifdef HAVE_DISABLE_HLT EXPORT_SYMBOL(disable_hlt); EXPORT_SYMBOL(enable_hlt); diff -urN -X dontdiff linux-2.5.64/lib/brlock.c linux-2.5-nobrlock/lib/brlock.c --- linux-2.5.64/lib/brlock.c 2003-03-11 09:08:01.000000000 -0800 +++ linux-2.5-nobrlock/lib/brlock.c 1969-12-31 16:00:00.000000000 -0800 @@ -1,72 +0,0 @@ -/* - * - * linux/lib/brlock.c - * - * 'Big Reader' read-write spinlocks. See linux/brlock.h for details. - * - * Copyright 2000, Ingo Molnar - * Copyright 2000, David S. Miller - */ - -#include - -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP - -#include -#include - -#ifdef __BRLOCK_USE_ATOMICS - -brlock_read_lock_t __brlock_array[NR_CPUS][__BR_IDX_MAX] = - { [0 ... NR_CPUS-1] = { [0 ... __BR_IDX_MAX-1] = RW_LOCK_UNLOCKED } }; - -void __br_write_lock (enum brlock_indices idx) -{ - int i; - - preempt_disable(); - for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) - _raw_write_lock(&__brlock_array[i][idx]); -} - -void __br_write_unlock (enum brlock_indices idx) -{ - int i; - - for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) - _raw_write_unlock(&__brlock_array[i][idx]); - preempt_enable(); -} - -#else /* ! __BRLOCK_USE_ATOMICS */ - -brlock_read_lock_t __brlock_array[NR_CPUS][__BR_IDX_MAX] = - { [0 ... NR_CPUS-1] = { [0 ... __BR_IDX_MAX-1] = 0 } }; - -struct br_wrlock __br_write_locks[__BR_IDX_MAX] = - { [0 ... __BR_IDX_MAX-1] = { SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED } }; - -void __br_write_lock (enum brlock_indices idx) -{ - int i; - - preempt_disable(); -again: - _raw_spin_lock(&__br_write_locks[idx].lock); - for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) - if (__brlock_array[i][idx] != 0) { - _raw_spin_unlock(&__br_write_locks[idx].lock); - barrier(); - cpu_relax(); - goto again; - } -} - -void __br_write_unlock (enum brlock_indices idx) -{ - spin_unlock(&__br_write_locks[idx].lock); -} - -#endif /* __BRLOCK_USE_ATOMICS */ - -#endif /* CONFIG_SMP */ diff -urN -X dontdiff linux-2.5.64/lib/Makefile linux-2.5-nobrlock/lib/Makefile --- linux-2.5.64/lib/Makefile 2003-03-11 09:08:01.000000000 -0800 +++ linux-2.5-nobrlock/lib/Makefile 2003-03-10 15:38:10.000000000 -0800 @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ L_TARGET := lib.a -obj-y := errno.o ctype.o string.o vsprintf.o brlock.o cmdline.o \ +obj-y := errno.o ctype.o string.o vsprintf.o cmdline.o \ bust_spinlocks.o rbtree.o radix-tree.o dump_stack.o \ kobject.o idr.o - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/