Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] pipe: use __pipe_{lock,unlock} instead of spinlock
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc:     Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        "Christian Brauner (Microsoft)" <brauner@kernel.org>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>,
        Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20230107012324.30698-1-zhanghongchen@loongson.cn>
From:   Hongchen Zhang <zhanghongchen@loongson.cn>
Message-ID: <9fcb3f80-cb55-9a72-0e74-03ace2408d21@loongson.cn>
Date:   Fri, 13 Jan 2023 11:19:12 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux loongarch64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20230107012324.30698-1-zhanghongchen@loongson.cn>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi All,
any question about this patch, can it be merged?

Thanks
On 2023/1/7 am 9:23, Hongchen Zhang wrote:
> Use spinlock in pipe_read/write cost too much time,IMO
> pipe->{head,tail} can be protected by __pipe_{lock,unlock}.
> On the other hand, we can use __pipe_{lock,unlock} to protect
> the pipe->{head,tail} in pipe_resize_ring and
> post_one_notification.
> 
> Reminded by Matthew, I tested this patch using UnixBench's pipe
> test case on a x86_64 machine,and get the following data:
> 1) before this patch
> System Benchmarks Partial Index  BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
> Pipe Throughput                   12440.0     493023.3    396.3
>                                                          ========
> System Benchmarks Index Score (Partial Only)              396.3
> 
> 2) after this patch
> System Benchmarks Partial Index  BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
> Pipe Throughput                   12440.0     507551.4    408.0
>                                                          ========
> System Benchmarks Index Score (Partial Only)              408.0
> 
> so we get ~3% speedup.
> 
> Reminded by Andrew, I tested this patch with the test code in
> Linus's 0ddad21d3e99 add get following result:
> 1) before this patch
>           13,136.54 msec task-clock           #    3.870 CPUs utilized
>           1,186,779      context-switches     #   90.342 K/sec
>             668,867      cpu-migrations       #   50.917 K/sec
>                 895      page-faults          #   68.131 /sec
>      29,875,711,543      cycles               #    2.274 GHz
>      12,372,397,462      instructions         #    0.41  insn per cycle
>       2,480,235,723      branches             #  188.804 M/sec
>          47,191,943      branch-misses        #    1.90% of all branches
> 
>         3.394806886 seconds time elapsed
> 
>         0.037869000 seconds user
>         0.189346000 seconds sys
> 
> 2) after this patch
> 
>           12,395.63 msec task-clock          #    4.138 CPUs utilized
>           1,193,381      context-switches    #   96.274 K/sec
>             585,543      cpu-migrations      #   47.238 K/sec
>               1,063      page-faults         #   85.756 /sec
>      27,691,587,226      cycles              #    2.234 GHz
>      11,738,307,999      instructions        #    0.42  insn per cycle
>       2,351,299,522      branches            #  189.688 M/sec
>          45,404,526      branch-misses       #    1.93% of all branches
> 
>         2.995280878 seconds time elapsed
> 
>         0.010615000 seconds user
>         0.206999000 seconds sys
> After adding this patch, the time used on this test program becomes less.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hongchen Zhang <zhanghongchen@loongson.cn>
> 
> v3:
>    - fixes the error reported by kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
>      Link: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202301061340.c954d61f-oliver.sang@intel.com
>    - add perf stat data for the test code in Linus's 0ddad21d3e99 in
>      commit message.
> v2:
>    - add UnixBench test data in commit message
>    - fixes the test error reported by kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
>      by adding the missing fs.h header file.
> ---
>   fs/pipe.c                 | 22 +---------------------
>   include/linux/pipe_fs_i.h | 12 ++++++++++++
>   kernel/watch_queue.c      |  8 ++++----
>   3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/pipe.c b/fs/pipe.c
> index 42c7ff41c2db..4355ee5f754e 100644
> --- a/fs/pipe.c
> +++ b/fs/pipe.c
> @@ -98,16 +98,6 @@ void pipe_unlock(struct pipe_inode_info *pipe)
>   }
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL(pipe_unlock);
>   
> -static inline void __pipe_lock(struct pipe_inode_info *pipe)
> -{
> -	mutex_lock_nested(&pipe->mutex, I_MUTEX_PARENT);
> -}
> -
> -static inline void __pipe_unlock(struct pipe_inode_info *pipe)
> -{
> -	mutex_unlock(&pipe->mutex);
> -}
> -
>   void pipe_double_lock(struct pipe_inode_info *pipe1,
>   		      struct pipe_inode_info *pipe2)
>   {
> @@ -253,8 +243,7 @@ pipe_read(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *to)
>   	 */
>   	was_full = pipe_full(pipe->head, pipe->tail, pipe->max_usage);
>   	for (;;) {
> -		/* Read ->head with a barrier vs post_one_notification() */
> -		unsigned int head = smp_load_acquire(&pipe->head);
> +		unsigned int head = pipe->head;
>   		unsigned int tail = pipe->tail;
>   		unsigned int mask = pipe->ring_size - 1;
>   
> @@ -322,14 +311,12 @@ pipe_read(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *to)
>   
>   			if (!buf->len) {
>   				pipe_buf_release(pipe, buf);
> -				spin_lock_irq(&pipe->rd_wait.lock);
>   #ifdef CONFIG_WATCH_QUEUE
>   				if (buf->flags & PIPE_BUF_FLAG_LOSS)
>   					pipe->note_loss = true;
>   #endif
>   				tail++;
>   				pipe->tail = tail;
> -				spin_unlock_irq(&pipe->rd_wait.lock);
>   			}
>   			total_len -= chars;
>   			if (!total_len)
> @@ -506,16 +493,13 @@ pipe_write(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from)
>   			 * it, either the reader will consume it or it'll still
>   			 * be there for the next write.
>   			 */
> -			spin_lock_irq(&pipe->rd_wait.lock);
>   
>   			head = pipe->head;
>   			if (pipe_full(head, pipe->tail, pipe->max_usage)) {
> -				spin_unlock_irq(&pipe->rd_wait.lock);
>   				continue;
>   			}
>   
>   			pipe->head = head + 1;
> -			spin_unlock_irq(&pipe->rd_wait.lock);
>   
>   			/* Insert it into the buffer array */
>   			buf = &pipe->bufs[head & mask];
> @@ -1260,14 +1244,12 @@ int pipe_resize_ring(struct pipe_inode_info *pipe, unsigned int nr_slots)
>   	if (unlikely(!bufs))
>   		return -ENOMEM;
>   
> -	spin_lock_irq(&pipe->rd_wait.lock);
>   	mask = pipe->ring_size - 1;
>   	head = pipe->head;
>   	tail = pipe->tail;
>   
>   	n = pipe_occupancy(head, tail);
>   	if (nr_slots < n) {
> -		spin_unlock_irq(&pipe->rd_wait.lock);
>   		kfree(bufs);
>   		return -EBUSY;
>   	}
> @@ -1303,8 +1285,6 @@ int pipe_resize_ring(struct pipe_inode_info *pipe, unsigned int nr_slots)
>   	pipe->tail = tail;
>   	pipe->head = head;
>   
> -	spin_unlock_irq(&pipe->rd_wait.lock);
> -
>   	/* This might have made more room for writers */
>   	wake_up_interruptible(&pipe->wr_wait);
>   	return 0;
> diff --git a/include/linux/pipe_fs_i.h b/include/linux/pipe_fs_i.h
> index 6cb65df3e3ba..f5084daf6eaf 100644
> --- a/include/linux/pipe_fs_i.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pipe_fs_i.h
> @@ -2,6 +2,8 @@
>   #ifndef _LINUX_PIPE_FS_I_H
>   #define _LINUX_PIPE_FS_I_H
>   
> +#include <linux/fs.h>
> +
>   #define PIPE_DEF_BUFFERS	16
>   
>   #define PIPE_BUF_FLAG_LRU	0x01	/* page is on the LRU */
> @@ -223,6 +225,16 @@ static inline void pipe_discard_from(struct pipe_inode_info *pipe,
>   #define PIPE_SIZE		PAGE_SIZE
>   
>   /* Pipe lock and unlock operations */
> +static inline void __pipe_lock(struct pipe_inode_info *pipe)
> +{
> +	mutex_lock_nested(&pipe->mutex, I_MUTEX_PARENT);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void __pipe_unlock(struct pipe_inode_info *pipe)
> +{
> +	mutex_unlock(&pipe->mutex);
> +}
> +
>   void pipe_lock(struct pipe_inode_info *);
>   void pipe_unlock(struct pipe_inode_info *);
>   void pipe_double_lock(struct pipe_inode_info *, struct pipe_inode_info *);
> diff --git a/kernel/watch_queue.c b/kernel/watch_queue.c
> index a6f9bdd956c3..92e46cfe9419 100644
> --- a/kernel/watch_queue.c
> +++ b/kernel/watch_queue.c
> @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ static bool post_one_notification(struct watch_queue *wqueue,
>   	if (!pipe)
>   		return false;
>   
> -	spin_lock_irq(&pipe->rd_wait.lock);
> +	__pipe_lock(pipe);
>   
>   	mask = pipe->ring_size - 1;
>   	head = pipe->head;
> @@ -135,17 +135,17 @@ static bool post_one_notification(struct watch_queue *wqueue,
>   	buf->offset = offset;
>   	buf->len = len;
>   	buf->flags = PIPE_BUF_FLAG_WHOLE;
> -	smp_store_release(&pipe->head, head + 1); /* vs pipe_read() */
> +	pipe->head = head + 1;
>   
>   	if (!test_and_clear_bit(note, wqueue->notes_bitmap)) {
> -		spin_unlock_irq(&pipe->rd_wait.lock);
> +		__pipe_unlock(pipe);
>   		BUG();
>   	}
>   	wake_up_interruptible_sync_poll_locked(&pipe->rd_wait, EPOLLIN | EPOLLRDNORM);
>   	done = true;
>   
>   out:
> -	spin_unlock_irq(&pipe->rd_wait.lock);
> +	__pipe_unlock(pipe);
>   	if (done)
>   		kill_fasync(&pipe->fasync_readers, SIGIO, POLL_IN);
>   	return done;
> 
> base-commit: c8451c141e07a8d05693f6c8d0e418fbb4b68bb7
>