From: Peter Oskolkov <posk@posk.io>
To: "André Almeida" <andrealmeid@collabora.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
kernel@collabora.com, krisman@collabora.com,
pgriffais@valvesoftware.com, z.figura12@gmail.com,
joel@joelfernandes.org, malteskarupke@fastmail.fm,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org, fweimer@redhat.com,
libc-alpha@sourceware.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
shuah@kernel.org, acme@kernel.org,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/13] Add futex2 syscall
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2021 12:08:54 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFTs51XnZFRHcw9qgpD-ZoQJa=WRU9c0y1ZJB1-xk6=7TmMhNA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFTs51VEj7hVfohcNNqOJtJYkDQ_pd76HAmJWWUFKbiMwsewAw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 12:03 PM Peter Oskolkov <posk@posk.io> wrote:
>
> Hi André!
>
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 10:58 AM André Almeida <andrealmeid@collabora.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > Às 02:44 de 04/03/21, Peter Oskolkov escreveu:
> > > On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 5:22 PM André Almeida <andrealmeid@collabora.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> This patch series introduces the futex2 syscalls.
> > >>
> > >> * FAQ
> > >>
> > >> ** "And what's about FUTEX_64?"
> > >>
> > >> By supporting 64 bit futexes, the kernel structure for futex would
> > >> need to have a 64 bit field for the value, and that could defeat one of
> > >> the purposes of having different sized futexes in the first place:
> > >> supporting smaller ones to decrease memory usage. This might be
> > >> something that could be disabled for 32bit archs (and even for
> > >> CONFIG_BASE_SMALL).
> > >>
> > >> Which use case would benefit for FUTEX_64? Does it worth the trade-offs?
> > >
> > > The ability to store a pointer value on 64bit platforms is an
> > > important use case.
> > > Imagine a simple producer/consumer scenario, with the producer updating
> > > some shared memory data and waking the consumer. Storing the pointer
> > > in the futex makes it so that only one shared memory location needs to be
> > > accessed "atomically", etc. With two atomics synchronization becomes
> > > more involved (= slower).
> > >
> >
> > So the idea is to, instead of doing this:
> >
> > T1:
> > atomic_set(&shm_addr, buffer_addr);
> > atomic_set(&futex, 0);
> > futex_wake(&futex, 1);
> >
> > T2:
> > consume(shm_addr);
> >
> > To do that:
> >
> > T1:
> > atomic_set(&futex, buffer_addr);
> > futex_wake(&futex, 1);
> >
> > T2:
> > consume(futex);
> >
> > Right?
>
> More like this:
>
> T1 (producer):
> while (true) {
> ptr = get_new_data();
> atomic_set(&futex, ptr);
> futex_wake(&futex, 1);
> }
>
> T1 (consumer):
> some_data *prev = NULL;
> while (true) {
> futex_wait(&futex, prev);
> some_data *next = atomic_get(&futex);
> if (next == prev) continue; /* spurious wakeup */
>
> consume_data(next);
> prev = next;
> }
Or an even more complete example:
T1 (producer):
while (true) {
next = get_new_data();
atomic_set(&futex, next);
futex_wake(&futex, 1);
/* wait for the consumer */
prev = next;
do {
next = atomic_get(&futex);
futex_wait(&futex, prev);
} while (next != NULL);
}
T2 (consumer):
some_data *prev = NULL;
while (true) {
futex_wait(&futex, prev);
some_data *next = atomic_get(&futex);
if (next == prev) continue; /* spurious wakeup */
consume_data(next);
prev = next;
atomic_set(&futex, NULL);
futex_wake(&futex, 1); /* signal we can consumer more */
}
>
>
>
> >
> > I'll try to write a small test to see how the perf numbers looks like.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-05 20:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-04 0:42 André Almeida
2021-03-04 0:42 ` [RFC PATCH v2 01/13] futex2: Implement wait and wake functions André Almeida
2021-03-04 0:42 ` [RFC PATCH v2 02/13] futex2: Add support for shared futexes André Almeida
2021-03-04 0:42 ` [RFC PATCH v2 03/13] futex2: Implement vectorized wait André Almeida
2021-03-04 0:42 ` [RFC PATCH v2 04/13] futex2: Implement requeue operation André Almeida
2021-03-04 0:42 ` [RFC PATCH v2 05/13] futex2: Add compatibility entry point for x86_x32 ABI André Almeida
2021-03-04 0:42 ` [RFC PATCH v2 06/13] docs: locking: futex2: Add documentation André Almeida
2021-03-04 0:42 ` [RFC PATCH v2 07/13] selftests: futex2: Add wake/wait test André Almeida
2021-03-04 0:42 ` [RFC PATCH v2 08/13] selftests: futex2: Add timeout test André Almeida
2021-03-04 0:42 ` [RFC PATCH v2 09/13] selftests: futex2: Add wouldblock test André Almeida
2021-03-04 0:42 ` [RFC PATCH v2 10/13] selftests: futex2: Add waitv test André Almeida
2021-03-04 0:42 ` [RFC PATCH v2 11/13] selftests: futex2: Add requeue test André Almeida
2021-03-04 0:42 ` [RFC PATCH v2 12/13] perf bench: Add futex2 benchmark tests André Almeida
2021-03-04 0:42 ` [RFC PATCH v2 13/13] kernel: Enable waitpid() for futex2 André Almeida
2021-03-04 5:44 ` [RFC PATCH v2 00/13] Add futex2 syscall Peter Oskolkov
2021-03-04 18:58 ` André Almeida
2021-03-05 20:03 ` Peter Oskolkov
2021-03-05 20:08 ` Peter Oskolkov [this message]
2021-03-04 15:01 ` Theodore Ts'o
2021-03-04 19:15 ` André Almeida
2021-03-07 11:34 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2021-03-07 11:56 ` Daurnimator
2021-03-08 11:52 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2021-03-08 11:11 ` David Laight
2021-03-08 11:55 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2021-03-08 16:18 ` Zebediah Figura
2021-03-08 17:33 ` David Laight
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAFTs51XnZFRHcw9qgpD-ZoQJa=WRU9c0y1ZJB1-xk6=7TmMhNA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=posk@posk.io \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=andrealmeid@collabora.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=kernel@collabora.com \
--cc=krisman@collabora.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=malteskarupke@fastmail.fm \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pgriffais@valvesoftware.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=z.figura12@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).