ARM: mutex: use generic atomic_dec-based implementation for ARMv6+

Commit a76d7bd96d65 ("ARM: 7467/1: mutex: use generic xchg-based
implementation for ARMv6+") removed the barrier-less, ARM-specific
mutex implementation in favour of the generic xchg-based code.

Since then, a bug was uncovered in the xchg code when running on SMP
platforms, due to interactions between the locking paths and the
MUTEX_SPIN_ON_OWNER code. This was fixed in 0bce9c46bf3b ("mutex: place
lock in contended state after fastpath_lock failure"), however, the
atomic_dec-based mutex algorithm is now marginally more efficient for
ARM (~0.5% improvement in hackbench scores on dual A15).

This patch moves ARMv6+ platforms to the atomic_dec-based mutex code.

Change-Id: I8f64e98ccb61cc1cb9cb68ee15e55d8a792792f5
Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Acked-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org>
Reviewed-on: http://git-master/r/130941
Reviewed-by: Automatic_Commit_Validation_User
Reviewed-by: Bharat Nihalani <bnihalani@nvidia.com>
Tested-by: Bharat Nihalani <bnihalani@nvidia.com>
block: recursive merge requests

In a workload, thread 1 accesses a, a+2, ..., thread 2 accesses a+1, a+3,....
When the requests are flushed to queue, a and a+1 are merged to (a, a+1), a+2
and a+3 too to (a+2, a+3), but (a, a+1) and (a+2, a+3) aren't merged.

If we do recursive merge for such interleave access, some workloads throughput
get improvement. A recent worload I'm checking on is swap, below change
boostes the throughput around 5% ~ 10%.

Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shli@fusionio.com>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Signed-off-by: Francisco Franco <franciscofranco.1990@gmail.com>
hwrng: add randomness to system from rng sources

When bringing a new RNG source online, it seems like it would make sense
to use some of its bytes to make the system entropy pool more random,
as done with all sorts of other devices that contain per-device or
per-boot differences.

Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>

Signed-off-by: Paul Reioux <reioux@gmail.com>
CHROMIUM: mm: Fix calculation of dirtyable memory

The system uses global_dirtyable_memory() to calculate
number of dirtyable pages/pages that can be allocated
to the page cache.  A bug causes an underflow thus making
the page count look like a big unsigned number.  This in turn
confuses the dirty writeback throttling to aggressively write
back pages as they become dirty (usually 1 page at a time).

Fix is to ensure there is no underflow while doing the math.

Signed-off-by: Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Puneet Kumar <puneetster@chromium.org>

BUG=chrome-os-partner:16011
TEST=Manual; boot kernel, powerwash, login with testaccount and
make sure no jank occurs on sync of applications

Change-Id: I614e7c3156e014f0f28a4ef9bdd8cb8a2cd07b2a
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.chromium.org/gerrit/37612
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Olof Johansson <olofj@chromium.org>
Commit-Ready: Puneet Kumar <puneetster@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Puneet Kumar <puneetster@chromium.org>
Tested-by: Puneet Kumar <puneetster@chromium.org>
writeback: fix occasional slow sync(1)

In case when system contains no dirty pages, wakeup_flusher_threads() will
submit WB_SYNC_NONE writeback for 0 pages so wb_writeback() exits
immediately without doing anything, even though there are dirty inodes in
the system.  Thus sync(1) will write all the dirty inodes from a
WB_SYNC_ALL writeback pass which is slow.

Fix the problem by using get_nr_dirty_pages() in wakeup_flusher_threads()
instead of calculating number of dirty pages manually.  That function also
takes number of dirty inodes into account.

Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Reported-by: Paul Taysom <taysom@chromium.org>
Cc: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
jiffies conversions: Use compile time constants when possible

Date	Fri, 04 Jan 2013 13:15:43 -0800

Do the multiplications and divisions at compile time
instead of runtime when the converted value is a constant.

Make the calculation functions static __always_inline to jiffies.h.

Add #defines with __builtin_constant_p to test and use the
static inline or the runtime functions as appropriate.

Prefix the old exported symbols/functions with __

Signed-off-by: Paul Reioux <reioux@gmail.com>
softirq: reduce latencies

Date	Thu, 03 Jan 2013 23:49:40 -0800

In various network workloads, __do_softirq() latencies can be up
to 20 ms if HZ=1000, and 200 ms if HZ=100.

This is because we iterate 10 times in the softirq dispatcher,
and some actions can consume a lot of cycles.

This patch changes the fallback to ksoftirqd condition to :

- A time limit of 2 ms.
- need_resched() being set on current task

When one of this condition is met, we wakeup ksoftirqd for further
softirq processing if we still have pending softirqs.

Using need_resched() as the only condition can trigger RCU stalls,
as we can keep BH disabled for too long.

I ran several benchmarks and got no significant difference in
throughput, but a very significant reduction of latencies (one order
of magnitude) :

In following bench, 200 antagonist "netperf -t TCP_RR" are started in
background, using all available cpus.

Then we start one "netperf -t TCP_RR", bound to the cpu handling the NIC
IRQ (hard+soft)

Before patch :

RT_LATENCY,MIN_LATENCY,MAX_LATENCY,P50_LATENCY,P90_LATENCY,P99_LATENCY,MEAN_LATENCY,STDDEV_LATENCY
MIGRATED TCP REQUEST/RESPONSE TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET
to 7.7.7.84 () port 0 AF_INET : first burst 0 : cpu bind
RT_LATENCY=550110.424
MIN_LATENCY=146858
MAX_LATENCY=997109
P50_LATENCY=305000
P90_LATENCY=550000
P99_LATENCY=710000
MEAN_LATENCY=376989.12
STDDEV_LATENCY=184046.92
After patch :

RT_LATENCY,MIN_LATENCY,MAX_LATENCY,P50_LATENCY,P90_LATENCY,P99_LATENCY,MEAN_LATENCY,STDDEV_LATENCY
MIGRATED TCP REQUEST/RESPONSE TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET
to 7.7.7.84 () port 0 AF_INET : first burst 0 : cpu bind
RT_LATENCY=40545.492
MIN_LATENCY=9834
MAX_LATENCY=78366
P50_LATENCY=33583
P90_LATENCY=59000
P99_LATENCY=69000
MEAN_LATENCY=38364.67
STDDEV_LATENCY=12865.26

Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Tom Herbert <therbert@google.com>
Cc: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>

Signed-off-by: Paul Reioux <reioux@gmail.com>
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
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Luka Karinja <lk@varjanta.com>
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
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Luka Karinja <lk@varjanta.com>
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>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Luka Karinja <lk@varjanta.com>
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>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Luka Karinja <lk@varjanta.com>
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>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Luka Karinja <lk@varjanta.com>
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>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Luka Karinja <lk@varjanta.com>
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>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Luka Karinja <lk@varjanta.com>
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>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
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>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
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>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
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>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
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>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
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>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>