rwsem: Implement writer lock-stealing for better scalability

Commit 5a505085f043 ("mm/rmap: Convert the struct anon_vma::mutex
to an rwsem") changed struct anon_vma::mutex to an rwsem, which
caused aim7 fork_test performance to drop by 50%.

Yuanhan Liu did the following excellent analysis:

    https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/1/29/84

and found that the regression is caused by strict, serialized,
FIFO sequential write-ownership of rwsems. Ingo suggested
implementing opportunistic lock-stealing for the front writer
task in the waitqueue.

Yuanhan Liu implemented lock-stealing for spinlock-rwsems,
which indeed recovered much of the regression - confirming
the analysis that the main factor in the regression was the
FIFO writer-fairness of rwsems.

In this patch we allow lock-stealing to happen when the first
waiter is also writer. With that change in place the
aim7 fork_test performance is fully recovered on my
Intel NHM EP, NHM EX, SNB EP 2S and 4S test-machines.

Reported-by: lkp@linux.intel.com
Reported-by: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: paul.gortmaker@windriver.com
Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/1/29/84
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1360069915-31619-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@intel.com
[ Small stylistic fixes, updated changelog. ]
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
rwsem-spinlock: Implement writer lock-stealing for better scalability

We (Linux Kernel Performance project) found a regression
introduced by commit:

  5a505085f043 mm/rmap: Convert the struct anon_vma::mutex to an rwsem

which converted all anon_vma::mutex locks rwsem write locks.

The semantics are the same, but the behavioral difference is
quite huge in some cases. After investigating it we found the
root cause: mutexes support lock stealing while rwsems don't.

Here is the link for the detailed regression report:

  https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/1/29/84

Ingo suggested adding write lock stealing to rwsems:

    "I think we should allow lock-steal between rwsem writers - that
     will not hurt fairness as most rwsem fairness concerns relate to
     reader vs. writer fairness"

And here is the rwsem-spinlock version.

With this patch, we got a double performance increase in one
test box with following aim7 workfile:

    FILESIZE: 1M
    POOLSIZE: 10M
    10 fork_test

 /usr/bin/time output w/o patch                       /usr/bin/time_output with patch
 -- Percent of CPU this job got: 369%                 Percent of CPU this job got: 537%
 Voluntary context switches: 640595016                Voluntary context switches: 157915561

We got a 45% increase in CPU usage and saved about 3/4 voluntary context switches.

Reported-by: LKP project <lkp@linux.intel.com>
Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: paul.gortmaker@windriver.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1359716356-23865-1-git-send-email-yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
rwsem: make the waiter type an enumeration rather than a bitmask

We are not planning to add some new waiter flags, so we can convert the
waiter type into an enumeration.

Background: David Howells suggested I do this back when I tried adding
a new waiter type for unfair readers. However, I believe the cleanup
applies regardless of that use case.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
rwsem: shorter spinlocked section in rwsem_down_failed_common()

This change reduces the size of the spinlocked and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE
sections in rwsem_down_failed_common():

- We only need the sem->wait_lock to insert ourselves on the wait_list;
  the waiter node can be prepared outside of the wait_lock.

- The task state only needs to be set to TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE immediately
  before checking if we actually need to sleep; it doesn't need to protect
  the entire function.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
rwsem: move rwsem_down_failed_common code into rwsem_down_{read,write}_failed

Remove the rwsem_down_failed_common function and replace it with two
identical copies of its code in rwsem_down_{read,write}_failed.

This is because we want to make different optimizations in
rwsem_down_{read,write}_failed; we are adding this pure-duplication
step as a separate commit in order to make it easier to check the
following steps.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
rwsem: simplify rwsem_down_read_failed

When trying to acquire a read lock, the RWSEM_ACTIVE_READ_BIAS
adjustment doesn't cause other readers to block, so we never have to
worry about waking them back after canceling this adjustment in
rwsem_down_read_failed().

We also never want to steal the lock in rwsem_down_read_failed(), so we
don't have to grab the wait_lock either.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
rwsem: simplify rwsem_down_write_failed

When waking writers, we never grant them the lock - instead, they have
to acquire it themselves when they run, and remove themselves from the
wait_list when they succeed.

As a result, we can do a few simplifications in rwsem_down_write_failed():

- We don't need to check for !waiter.task since __rwsem_do_wake() doesn't
  remove writers from the wait_list

- There is no point releaseing the wait_lock before entering the wait loop,
  as we will need to reacquire it immediately. We can change the loop so
  that the lock is always held at the start of each loop iteration.

- We don't need to get a reference on the task structure, since the task
  is responsible for removing itself from the wait_list. There is no risk,
  like in the rwsem_down_read_failed() case, that a task would wake up and
  exit (thus destroying its task structure) while __rwsem_do_wake() is
  still running - wait_lock protects against that.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
rwsem: more agressive lock stealing in rwsem_down_write_failed

Some small code simplifications can be achieved by doing more agressive
lock stealing:

- When rwsem_down_write_failed() notices that there are no active locks
  (and thus no thread to wake us if we decided to sleep), it used to wake
  the first queued process. However, stealing the lock is also sufficient
  to deal with this case, so we don't need this check anymore.

- In try_get_writer_sem(), we can steal the lock even when the first waiter
  is a reader. This is correct because the code path that wakes readers is
  protected by the wait_lock. As to the performance effects of this change,
  they are expected to be minimal: readers are still granted the lock
  (rather than having to acquire it themselves) when they reach the front
  of the wait queue, so we have essentially the same behavior as in
  rwsem-spinlock.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
rwsem: use cmpxchg for trying to steal write lock

Using rwsem_atomic_update to try stealing the write lock forced us to
undo the adjustment in the failure path.  We can have simpler and faster
code by using cmpxchg instead.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
rwsem: avoid taking wait_lock in rwsem_down_write_failed

In rwsem_down_write_failed(), if there are active locks after we wake up
(i.e.  the lock got stolen from us), skip taking the wait_lock and go
back to sleep immediately.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
rwsem: skip initial trylock in rwsem_down_write_failed

We can skip the initial trylock in rwsem_down_write_failed() if there
are known active lockers already, thus saving one likely-to-fail
cmpxchg.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
rwsem: simplify __rwsem_do_wake

This is mostly for cleanup value:

- We don't need several gotos to handle the case where the first
  waiter is a writer. Two simple tests will do (and generate very
  similar code).

- In the remainder of the function, we know the first waiter is a reader,
  so we don't have to double check that. We can use do..while loops
  to iterate over the readers to wake (generates slightly better code).

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
rwsem: implement support for write lock stealing on the fastpath

When we decide to wake up readers, we must first grant them as many read
locks as necessary, and then actually wake up all these readers.  But in
order to know how many read shares to grant, we must first count the
readers at the head of the queue.  This might take a while if there are
many readers, and we want to be protected against a writer stealing the
lock while we're counting.  To that end, we grant the first reader lock
before counting how many more readers are queued.

We also require some adjustments to the wake_type semantics.

RWSEM_WAKE_NO_ACTIVE used to mean that we had found the count to be
RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS, in which case the rwsem was known to be free as
nobody could steal it while we hold the wait_lock.  This doesn't make
sense once we implement fastpath write lock stealing, so we now use
RWSEM_WAKE_ANY in that case.

Similarly, when rwsem_down_write_failed found that a read lock was
active, it would use RWSEM_WAKE_READ_OWNED which signalled that new
readers could be woken without checking first that the rwsem was
available.  We can't do that anymore since the existing readers might
release their read locks, and a writer could steal the lock before we
wake up additional readers.  So, we have to use a new RWSEM_WAKE_READERS
value to indicate we only want to wake readers, but we don't currently
hold any read lock.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
rwsem: do not block readers at head of queue if other readers are active

This change fixes a race condition where a reader might determine it
needs to block, but by the time it acquires the wait_lock the rwsem has
active readers and no queued waiters.

In this situation the reader can run in parallel with the existing
active readers; it does not need to block until the active readers
complete.

Thanks to Peter Hurley for noticing this possible race.

Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
rwsem: no need for explicit signed longs

Change explicit "signed long" declarations into plain "long" as suggested
by Peter Hurley.

Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Reviewed-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
rwsem: check counter to avoid cmpxchg calls

This patch tries to reduce the amount of cmpxchg calls in the writer
failed path by checking the counter value first before issuing the
instruction.  If ->count is not set to RWSEM_WAITING_BIAS then there is
no point wasting a cmpxchg call.

Furthermore, Michel states "I suppose it helps due to the case where
someone else steals the lock while we're trying to acquire
sem->wait_lock."

Two very different workloads and machines were used to see how this
patch improves throughput: pgbench on a quad-core laptop and aim7 on a
large 8 socket box with 80 cores.

Some results comparing Michel's fast-path write lock stealing
(tps-rwsem) on a quad-core laptop running pgbench:

  | db_size | clients  |  tps-rwsem     |   tps-patch  |
  +---------+----------+----------------+--------------+
  | 160 MB   |       1 |           6906 |         9153 | + 32.5
  | 160 MB   |       2 |          15931 |        22487 | + 41.1%
  | 160 MB   |       4 |          33021 |        32503 |
  | 160 MB   |       8 |          34626 |        34695 |
  | 160 MB   |      16 |          33098 |        34003 |
  | 160 MB   |      20 |          31343 |        31440 |
  | 160 MB   |      30 |          28961 |        28987 |
  | 160 MB   |      40 |          26902 |        26970 |
  | 160 MB   |      50 |          25760 |        25810 |
  ------------------------------------------------------
  | 1.6 GB   |       1 |           7729 |         7537 |
  | 1.6 GB   |       2 |          19009 |        23508 | + 23.7%
  | 1.6 GB   |       4 |          33185 |        32666 |
  | 1.6 GB   |       8 |          34550 |        34318 |
  | 1.6 GB   |      16 |          33079 |        32689 |
  | 1.6 GB   |      20 |          31494 |        31702 |
  | 1.6 GB   |      30 |          28535 |        28755 |
  | 1.6 GB   |      40 |          27054 |        27017 |
  | 1.6 GB   |      50 |          25591 |        25560 |
  ------------------------------------------------------
  | 7.6 GB   |       1 |           6224 |         7469 | + 20.0%
  | 7.6 GB   |       2 |          13611 |        12778 |
  | 7.6 GB   |       4 |          33108 |        32927 |
  | 7.6 GB   |       8 |          34712 |        34878 |
  | 7.6 GB   |      16 |          32895 |        33003 |
  | 7.6 GB   |      20 |          31689 |        31974 |
  | 7.6 GB   |      30 |          29003 |        28806 |
  | 7.6 GB   |      40 |          26683 |        26976 |
  | 7.6 GB   |      50 |          25925 |        25652 |
  ------------------------------------------------------

For the aim7 worloads, they overall improved on top of Michel's
patchset.  For full graphs on how the rwsem series plus this patch
behaves on a large 8 socket machine against a vanilla kernel:

  http://stgolabs.net/rwsem-aim7-results.tar.gz

Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
lockdep, rwsem: provide down_write_nest_lock()

down_write_nest_lock() provides a means to annotate locking scenario
where an outer lock is guaranteed to serialize the order nested locks
are being acquired.

This is analogoue to already existing mutex_lock_nest_lock() and
spin_lock_nest_lock().

Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Tested-by: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
lockdep, rwsem: fix down_write_nest_lock() if !CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC

Commit 1b963c81b145 ("lockdep, rwsem: provide down_write_nest_lock()")
contains a bug in a codepath when CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC is disabled,
which causes down_read() to be called instead of down_write() by mistake
on such configurations.  Fix that.

Reported-and-tested-by: Andrew Clayton <andrew@digital-domain.net>
Reported-and-tested-by: Zlatko Calusic <zlatko.calusic@iskon.hr>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Revert "rw_semaphore: remove up/down_read_non_owner"

This reverts commit 11b80f459adaf91a712f95e7734a17655a36bf30.

Bcache needs rw semaphores for cache coherency in writeback mode -
writes have to take a read lock on a per cache device rw sem, and
release it when the bio completes.

But since this is for bios it's naturally not in the context of the
process that originally took the lock.

Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@google.com>
CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
CC: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
rwsem: add rwsem_is_contended

Btrfs needs a simple way to know if it needs to let go of it's read lock on a
rwsem.  Introduce rwsem_is_contended to check to see if there are any waiters on
this rwsem currently.  This is just a hueristic, it is meant to be light and not
100% accurate and called by somebody already holding on to the rwsem in either
read or write.  Thanks,

Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>