summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/kernel
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
...
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Add adaptive spinwait mechanismSteven Rostedt2021-08-171-2/+65
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Going to sleep when locks are contended can be quite inefficient when the contention time is short and the lock owner is running on a different CPU. The MCS mechanism cannot be used because MCS is strictly FIFO ordered while for rtmutex based locks the waiter ordering is priority based. Provide a simple adaptive spinwait mechanism which currently restricts the spinning to the top priority waiter. [ tglx: Provide a contemporary changelog, extended it to all rtmutex based locks and updated it to match the other spin on owner implementations ] Originally-by: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.912050691@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Implement equal priority lock stealingGregory Haskins2021-08-171-17/+35
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The current logic only allows lock stealing to occur if the current task is of higher priority than the pending owner. Significant throughput improvements can be gained by allowing the lock stealing to include tasks of equal priority when the contended lock is a spin_lock or a rw_lock and the tasks are not in a RT scheduling task. The assumption was that the system will make faster progress by allowing the task already on the CPU to take the lock rather than waiting for the system to wake up a different task. This does add a degree of unfairness, but in reality no negative side effects have been observed in the many years that this has been used in the RT kernel. [ tglx: Refactored and rewritten several times by Steve Rostedt, Sebastian Siewior and myself ] Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.857240222@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Prevent lockdep false positive with PI futexesThomas Gleixner2021-08-171-0/+12
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | On PREEMPT_RT the futex hashbucket spinlock becomes 'sleeping' and rtmutex based. That causes a lockdep false positive because some of the futex functions invoke spin_unlock(&hb->lock) with the wait_lock of the rtmutex associated to the pi_futex held. spin_unlock() in turn takes wait_lock of the rtmutex on which the spinlock is based which makes lockdep notice a lock recursion. Give the futex/rtmutex wait_lock a separate key. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.750701219@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | futex: Prevent requeue_pi() lock nesting issue on RTThomas Gleixner2021-08-171-49/+259
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The requeue_pi() operation on RT kernels creates a problem versus the task::pi_blocked_on state when a waiter is woken early (signal, timeout) and that early wake up interleaves with the requeue_pi() operation. When the requeue manages to block the waiter on the rtmutex which is associated to the second futex, then a concurrent early wakeup of that waiter faces the problem that it has to acquire the hash bucket spinlock, which is not an issue on non-RT kernels, but on RT kernels spinlocks are substituted by 'sleeping' spinlocks based on rtmutex. If the hash bucket lock is contended then blocking on that spinlock would result in a impossible situation: blocking on two locks at the same time (the hash bucket lock and the rtmutex representing the PI futex). It was considered to make the hash bucket locks raw_spinlocks, but especially requeue operations with a large amount of waiters can introduce significant latencies, so that's not an option for RT. The RT tree carried a solution which (ab)used task::pi_blocked_on to store the information about an ongoing requeue and an early wakeup which worked, but required to add checks for these special states all over the place. The distangling of an early wakeup of a waiter for a requeue_pi() operation is already looking at quite some different states and the task::pi_blocked_on magic just expanded that to a hard to understand 'state machine'. This can be avoided by keeping track of the waiter/requeue state in the futex_q object itself. Add a requeue_state field to struct futex_q with the following possible states: Q_REQUEUE_PI_NONE Q_REQUEUE_PI_IGNORE Q_REQUEUE_PI_IN_PROGRESS Q_REQUEUE_PI_WAIT Q_REQUEUE_PI_DONE Q_REQUEUE_PI_LOCKED The waiter starts with state = NONE and the following state transitions are valid: On the waiter side: Q_REQUEUE_PI_NONE -> Q_REQUEUE_PI_IGNORE Q_REQUEUE_PI_IN_PROGRESS -> Q_REQUEUE_PI_WAIT On the requeue side: Q_REQUEUE_PI_NONE -> Q_REQUEUE_PI_INPROGRESS Q_REQUEUE_PI_IN_PROGRESS -> Q_REQUEUE_PI_DONE/LOCKED Q_REQUEUE_PI_IN_PROGRESS -> Q_REQUEUE_PI_NONE (requeue failed) Q_REQUEUE_PI_WAIT -> Q_REQUEUE_PI_DONE/LOCKED Q_REQUEUE_PI_WAIT -> Q_REQUEUE_PI_IGNORE (requeue failed) The requeue side ignores a waiter with state Q_REQUEUE_PI_IGNORE as this signals that the waiter is already on the way out. It also means that the waiter is still on the 'wait' futex, i.e. uaddr1. The waiter side signals early wakeup to the requeue side either through setting state to Q_REQUEUE_PI_IGNORE or to Q_REQUEUE_PI_WAIT depending on the current state. In case of Q_REQUEUE_PI_IGNORE it can immediately proceed to take the hash bucket lock of uaddr1. If it set state to WAIT, which means the wakeup is interleaving with a requeue in progress it has to wait for the requeue side to change the state. Either to DONE/LOCKED or to IGNORE. DONE/LOCKED means the waiter q is now on the uaddr2 futex and either blocked (DONE) or has acquired it (LOCKED). IGNORE is set by the requeue side when the requeue attempt failed via deadlock detection and therefore the waiter's futex_q is still on the uaddr1 futex. While this is not strictly required on !RT making this unconditional has the benefit of common code and it also allows the waiter to avoid taking the hash bucket lock on the way out in certain cases, which reduces contention. Add the required helpers required for the state transitions, invoke them at the right places and restructure the futex_wait_requeue_pi() code to handle the return from wait (early or not) based on the state machine values. On !RT enabled kernels the waiter spin waits for the state going from Q_REQUEUE_PI_WAIT to some other state, on RT enabled kernels this is handled by rcuwait_wait_event() and the corresponding wake up on the requeue side. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.693317658@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | futex: Simplify handle_early_requeue_pi_wakeup()Thomas Gleixner2021-08-171-26/+22
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Move the futex key match out of handle_early_requeue_pi_wakeup() which allows to simplify that function. The upcoming state machine for requeue_pi() will make that go away. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.638938670@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | futex: Reorder sanity checks in futex_requeue()Thomas Gleixner2021-08-171-7/+7
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | No point in allocating memory when the input parameters are bogus. Validate all parameters before proceeding. Suggested-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.581789253@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | futex: Clarify comment in futex_requeue()Thomas Gleixner2021-08-171-8/+20
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The comment about the restriction of the number of waiters to wake for the REQUEUE_PI case is confusing at best. Rewrite it. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.524990421@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | futex: Restructure futex_requeue()Thomas Gleixner2021-08-171-49/+41
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | No point in taking two more 'requeue_pi' conditionals just to get to the requeue. Same for the requeue_pi case just the other way round. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.468835790@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | futex: Correct the number of requeued waiters for PIThomas Gleixner2021-08-171-0/+4
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The accounting is wrong when either the PI sanity check or the requeue PI operation fails. Adjust it in the failure path. Will be simplified in the next step. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.416427548@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | futex: Remove bogus condition for requeue PIThomas Gleixner2021-08-171-1/+1
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | For requeue PI it's required to establish PI state for the PI futex to which waiters are requeued. This either acquires the user space futex on behalf of the top most waiter on the inner 'waitqueue' futex, or attaches to the PI state of an existing waiter, or creates on attached to the owner of the futex. This code can retry in case of failure, but retry can never happen when the pi state was successfully created. The condition to run this code is: (task_count - nr_wake) < nr_requeue which is always true because: task_count = 0 nr_wake = 1 nr_requeue >= 0 Remove it completely. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.362730187@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | futex: Clarify futex_requeue() PI handlingThomas Gleixner2021-08-171-38/+23
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | When requeuing to a PI futex, then the requeue code tries to trylock the PI futex on behalf of the topmost waiter on the inner 'waitqueue' futex. If that succeeds, then PI state has to be allocated in order to requeue further waiters to the PI futex. The comment and the code are confusing, as the PI state allocation uses lookup_pi_state(), which either attaches to an existing waiter or to the owner. As the PI futex was just acquired, there cannot be a waiter on the PI futex because the hash bucket lock is held. Clarify the comment and use attach_to_pi_owner() directly. As the task on which behalf the PI futex has been acquired is guaranteed to be alive and not exiting, this call must succeed. Add a WARN_ON() in case that fails. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.305142462@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | futex: Clean up stale commentsThomas Gleixner2021-08-171-11/+7
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The futex key reference mechanism is long gone. Clean up the stale comments which still mention it. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.249178312@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | futex: Validate waiter correctly in futex_proxy_trylock_atomic()Thomas Gleixner2021-08-171-0/+7
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The loop in futex_requeue() has a sanity check for the waiter, which is missing in futex_proxy_trylock_atomic(). In theory the key2 check is sufficient, but futexes are cursed so add it for completeness and paranoia sake. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.193767519@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Add mutex variant for RTThomas Gleixner2021-08-172-1/+125
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Add the necessary defines, helpers and API functions for replacing struct mutex on a PREEMPT_RT enabled kernel with an rtmutex based variant. No functional change when CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT=n Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.081517417@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/ww_mutex: Implement rtmutex based ww_mutex API functionsPeter Zijlstra2021-08-172-1/+77
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Add the actual ww_mutex API functions which replace the mutex based variant on RT enabled kernels. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211305.024057938@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Extend the rtmutex core to support ww_mutexPeter Zijlstra2021-08-174-14/+115
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Add a ww acquire context pointer to the waiter and various functions and add the ww_mutex related invocations to the proper spots in the locking code, similar to the mutex based variant. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.966139174@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/ww_mutex: Add rt_mutex based lock type and accessorsPeter Zijlstra2021-08-171-3/+3
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Provide the defines for RT mutex based ww_mutexes and fix up the debug logic so it's either enabled by DEBUG_MUTEXES or DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES on RT kernels. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.908012566@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/ww_mutex: Add RT priority to W/W orderPeter Zijlstra2021-08-171-15/+49
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | RT mutex based ww_mutexes cannot order based on timestamps. They have to order based on priority. Add the necessary decision logic. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.847536630@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/ww_mutex: Implement rt_mutex accessorsPeter Zijlstra2021-08-171-0/+80
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Provide the type defines and the helper inlines for rtmutex based ww_mutexes. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.790760545@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/ww_mutex: Abstract out internal lock accessesThomas Gleixner2021-08-171-4/+19
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Accessing the internal wait_lock of mutex and rtmutex is slightly different. Provide helper functions for that. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.734635961@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/ww_mutex: Abstract out mutex typesPeter Zijlstra2021-08-171-10/+13
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Some ww_mutex helper functions use pointers for the underlying mutex and mutex_waiter. The upcoming rtmutex based implementation needs to share these functions. Add and use defines for the types and replace the direct types in the affected functions. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.678720245@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/ww_mutex: Abstract out mutex accessorsPeter Zijlstra2021-08-171-2/+14
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Move the mutex related access from various ww_mutex functions into helper functions so they can be substituted for rtmutex based ww_mutex later. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.622477030@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/ww_mutex: Abstract out waiter enqueueingPeter Zijlstra2021-08-171-6/+13
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The upcoming rtmutex based ww_mutex needs a different handling for enqueueing a waiter. Split it out into a helper function. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.566318143@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/ww_mutex: Abstract out the waiter iterationPeter Zijlstra2021-08-171-4/+53
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Split out the waiter iteration functions so they can be substituted for a rtmutex based ww_mutex later. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.509186185@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/ww_mutex: Remove the __sched annotation from ww_mutex APIsPeter Zijlstra2021-08-171-6/+6
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | None of these functions will be on the stack when blocking in schedule(), hence __sched is not needed. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.453235952@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/ww_mutex: Split out the W/W implementation logic into ↵Peter Zijlstra (Intel)2021-08-172-371/+370
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | kernel/locking/ww_mutex.h Split the W/W mutex helper functions out into a separate header file, so they can be shared with a rtmutex based variant later. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.396893399@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/ww_mutex: Split up ww_mutex_unlock()Peter Zijlstra (Intel)2021-08-171-11/+15
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Split the ww related part out into a helper function so it can be reused for a rtmutex based ww_mutex implementation. [ mingo: Fixed bisection failure. ] Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.340166556@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/ww_mutex: Gather mutex_waiter initializationPeter Zijlstra2021-08-172-9/+4
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.281927514@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/ww_mutex: Simplify lockdep annotationsPeter Zijlstra2021-08-171-9/+10
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | No functional change. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.222921634@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/mutex: Make mutex::wait_lock rawThomas Gleixner2021-08-171-11/+11
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The wait_lock of mutex is really a low level lock. Convert it to a raw_spinlock like the wait_lock of rtmutex. [ mingo: backmerged the test_lockup.c build fix by bigeasy. ] Co-developed-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.166863404@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/mutex: Move the 'struct mutex_waiter' definition from ↵Thomas Gleixner2021-08-171-0/+13
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | <linux/mutex.h> to the internal header Move the mutex waiter declaration from the public <linux/mutex.h> header to the internal kernel/locking/mutex.h header. There is no reason to expose it outside of the core code. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211304.054325923@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/mutex: Consolidate core headers, remove kernel/locking/mutex-debug.hThomas Gleixner2021-08-174-48/+26
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Having two header files which contain just the non-debug and debug variants is mostly waste of disc space and has no real value. Stick the debug variants into the common mutex.h file as counterpart to the stubs for the non-debug case. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.995350521@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Squash !RT tasks to DEFAULT_PRIOPeter Zijlstra2021-08-171-5/+20
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Ensure all !RT tasks have the same prio such that they end up in FIFO order and aren't split up according to nice level. The reason why nice levels were taken into account so far is historical. In the early days of the rtmutex code it was done to give the PI boosting and deboosting a larger coverage. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.938676930@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rwlock: Provide RT variantThomas Gleixner2021-08-174-1/+144
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Similar to rw_semaphores, on RT the rwlock substitution is not writer fair, because it's not feasible to have a writer inherit its priority to multiple readers. Readers blocked on a writer follow the normal rules of priority inheritance. Like RT spinlocks, RT rwlocks are state preserving across the slow lock operations (contended case). Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.882793524@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/spinlock: Provide RT variantThomas Gleixner2021-08-172-0/+130
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Provide the actual locking functions which make use of the general and spinlock specific rtmutex code. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.826621464@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Provide the spin/rwlock core lock functionThomas Gleixner2021-08-172-1/+61
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | A simplified version of the rtmutex slowlock function, which neither handles signals nor timeouts, and is careful about preserving the state of the blocked task across the lock operation. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.770228446@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Guard regular sleeping locks specific functionsThomas Gleixner2021-08-173-123/+133
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Guard the regular sleeping lock specific functionality, which is used for rtmutex on non-RT enabled kernels and for mutex, rtmutex and semaphores on RT enabled kernels so the code can be reused for the RT specific implementation of spinlocks and rwlocks in a different compilation unit. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.311535693@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Prepare RT rt_mutex_wake_q for RT locksThomas Gleixner2021-08-172-3/+20
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Add an rtlock_task pointer to rt_mutex_wake_q, which allows to handle the RT specific wakeup for spin/rwlock waiters. The pointer is just consuming 4/8 bytes on the stack so it is provided unconditionaly to avoid #ifdeffery all over the place. This cannot use a regular wake_q, because a task can have concurrent wakeups which would make it miss either lock or the regular wakeups, depending on what gets queued first, unless task struct gains a separate wake_q_node for this, which would be overkill, because there can only be a single task which gets woken up in the spin/rw_lock unlock path. No functional change for non-RT enabled kernels. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.253614678@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Use rt_mutex_wake_q_headThomas Gleixner2021-08-174-23/+20
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Prepare for the required state aware handling of waiter wakeups via wake_q and switch the rtmutex code over to the rtmutex specific wrapper. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.197113263@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Provide rt_wake_q_head and helpersThomas Gleixner2021-08-172-0/+29
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | To handle the difference between wakeups for regular sleeping locks (mutex, rtmutex, rw_semaphore) and the wakeups for 'sleeping' spin/rwlocks on PREEMPT_RT enabled kernels correctly, it is required to provide a wake_q_head construct which allows to keep them separate. Provide a wrapper around wake_q_head and the required helpers, which will be extended with the state handling later. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.139337655@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Add wake_state to rt_mutex_waiterThomas Gleixner2021-08-172-1/+10
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Regular sleeping locks like mutexes, rtmutexes and rw_semaphores are always entering and leaving a blocking section with task state == TASK_RUNNING. On a non-RT kernel spinlocks and rwlocks never affect the task state, but on RT kernels these locks are converted to rtmutex based 'sleeping' locks. So in case of contention the task goes to block, which requires to carefully preserve the task state, and restore it after acquiring the lock taking regular wakeups for the task into account, which happened while the task was blocked. This state preserving is achieved by having a separate task state for blocking on a RT spin/rwlock and a saved_state field in task_struct along with careful handling of these wakeup scenarios in try_to_wake_up(). To avoid conditionals in the rtmutex code, store the wake state which has to be used for waking a lock waiter in rt_mutex_waiter which allows to handle the regular and RT spin/rwlocks by handing it to wake_up_state(). Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.079800739@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rwsem: Add rtmutex based R/W semaphore implementationThomas Gleixner2021-08-171-0/+108
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The RT specific R/W semaphore implementation used to restrict the number of readers to one, because a writer cannot block on multiple readers and inherit its priority or budget. The single reader restricting was painful in various ways: - Performance bottleneck for multi-threaded applications in the page fault path (mmap sem) - Progress blocker for drivers which are carefully crafted to avoid the potential reader/writer deadlock in mainline. The analysis of the writer code paths shows that properly written RT tasks should not take them. Syscalls like mmap(), file access which take mmap sem write locked have unbound latencies, which are completely unrelated to mmap sem. Other R/W sem users like graphics drivers are not suitable for RT tasks either. So there is little risk to hurt RT tasks when the RT rwsem implementation is done in the following way: - Allow concurrent readers - Make writers block until the last reader left the critical section. This blocking is not subject to priority/budget inheritance. - Readers blocked on a writer inherit their priority/budget in the normal way. There is a drawback with this scheme: R/W semaphores become writer unfair though the applications which have triggered writer starvation (mostly on mmap_sem) in the past are not really the typical workloads running on a RT system. So while it's unlikely to hit writer starvation, it's possible. If there are unexpected workloads on RT systems triggering it, the problem has to be revisited. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211303.016885947@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rt: Add base code for RT rw_semaphore and rwlockThomas Gleixner2021-08-171-0/+263
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | On PREEMPT_RT, rw_semaphores and rwlocks are substituted with an rtmutex and a reader count. The implementation is writer unfair, as it is not feasible to do priority inheritance on multiple readers, but experience has shown that real-time workloads are not the typical workloads which are sensitive to writer starvation. The inner workings of rw_semaphores and rwlocks on RT are almost identical except for the task state and signal handling. rw_semaphores are not state preserving over a contention, they are expected to enter and leave with state == TASK_RUNNING. rwlocks have a mechanism to preserve the state of the task at entry and restore it after unblocking taking potential non-lock related wakeups into account. rw_semaphores can also be subject to signal handling interrupting a blocked state, while rwlocks ignore signals. To avoid code duplication, provide a shared implementation which takes the small difference vs. state and signals into account. The code is included into the relevant rw_semaphore/rwlock base code and compiled for each use case separately. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211302.957920571@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Provide rt_mutex_slowlock_locked()Thomas Gleixner2021-08-172-43/+59
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Split the inner workings of rt_mutex_slowlock() out into a separate function, which can be reused by the upcoming RT lock substitutions, e.g. for rw_semaphores. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211302.841971086@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Split out the inner parts of 'struct rtmutex'Peter Zijlstra2021-08-175-73/+80
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | RT builds substitutions for rwsem, mutex, spinlock and rwlock around rtmutexes. Split the inner working out so each lock substitution can use them with the appropriate lockdep annotations. This avoids having an extra unused lockdep map in the wrapped rtmutex. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211302.784739994@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Split API from implementationThomas Gleixner2021-08-174-498/+514
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Prepare for reusing the inner functions of rtmutex for RT lock substitutions: introduce kernel/locking/rtmutex_api.c and move them there. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211302.726560996@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Switch to from cmpxchg_*() to try_cmpxchg_*()Thomas Gleixner2021-08-171-2/+2
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Allows the compiler to generate better code depending on the architecture. Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211302.668958502@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | locking/rtmutex: Convert macros to inlinesSebastian Andrzej Siewior2021-08-171-4/+27
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Inlines are type-safe... Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211302.610830960@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | sched/core: Provide a scheduling point for RT locksThomas Gleixner2021-08-171-1/+19
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | RT enabled kernels substitute spin/rwlocks with 'sleeping' variants based on rtmutexes. Blocking on such a lock is similar to preemption versus: - I/O scheduling and worker handling, because these functions might block on another substituted lock, or come from a lock contention within these functions. - RCU considers this like a preemption, because the task might be in a read side critical section. Add a separate scheduling point for this, and hand a new scheduling mode argument to __schedule() which allows, along with separate mode masks, to handle this gracefully from within the scheduler, without proliferating that to other subsystems like RCU. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211302.372319055@linutronix.de
| * | | | | | | sched/core: Rework the __schedule() preempt argumentThomas Gleixner2021-08-171-11/+23
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | PREEMPT_RT needs to hand a special state into __schedule() when a task blocks on a 'sleeping' spin/rwlock. This is required to handle rcu_note_context_switch() correctly without having special casing in the RCU code. From an RCU point of view the blocking on the sleeping spinlock is equivalent to preemption, because the task might be in a read side critical section. schedule_debug() also has a check which would trigger with the !preempt case, but that could be handled differently. To avoid adding another argument and extra checks which cannot be optimized out by the compiler, the following solution has been chosen: - Replace the boolean 'preempt' argument with an unsigned integer 'sched_mode' argument and define constants to hand in: (0 == no preemption, 1 = preemption). - Add two masks to apply on that mode: one for the debug/rcu invocations, and one for the actual scheduling decision. For a non RT kernel these masks are UINT_MAX, i.e. all bits are set, which allows the compiler to optimize the AND operation out, because it is not masking out anything. IOW, it's not different from the boolean. RT enabled kernels will define these masks separately. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210815211302.315473019@linutronix.de