Messages in this thread | | | From | Guo Ren <> | Date | Thu, 3 Aug 2023 18:28:51 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v15 3/6] locking/qspinlock: Introduce CNA into the slow path of qspinlock |
| |
On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 4:50 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 02, 2023 at 07:14:05PM -0400, Guo Ren wrote: > > > The pv_ops is belongs to x86 custom frame work, and it prevent other > > architectures connect to the CNA spinlock. > > static_call() exists as a arch neutral variant of this. Emm... we have used static_call() in the riscv queued_spin_lock_: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230802164701.192791-20-guoren@kernel.org/
But we met a compile problem:
GEN .vmlinux.objs MODPOST Module.symvers ERROR: modpost: "__SCK__pv_queued_spin_unlock" [arch/riscv/kvm/kvm.ko] undefined! ERROR: modpost: "__SCK__pv_queued_spin_unlock" [kernel/locking/locktorture.ko] undefined! ERROR: modpost: "__SCK__pv_queued_spin_unlock" [mm/z3fold.ko] undefined! ERROR: modpost: "__SCK__pv_queued_spin_unlock" [fs/nfs_common/grace.ko] undefined! ERROR: modpost: "__SCK__pv_queued_spin_unlock" [fs/quota/quota_v1.ko] undefined! ERROR: modpost: "__SCK__pv_queued_spin_unlock" [fs/quota/quota_v2.ko] undefined! ERROR: modpost: "__SCK__pv_queued_spin_unlock" [fs/quota/quota_tree.ko] undefined! ERROR: modpost: "__SCK__pv_queued_spin_unlock" [fs/fuse/virtiofs.ko] undefined! ERROR: modpost: "__SCK__pv_queued_spin_unlock" [fs/dlm/dlm.ko] undefined! ERROR: modpost: "__SCK__pv_queued_spin_unlock" [fs/fscache/fscache.ko] undefined! WARNING: modpost: suppressed 839 unresolved symbol warnings because there were too many) /home/guoren/source/kernel/linux/scripts/Makefile.modpost:144: recipe for target 'Module.symvers' failed
Our solution is: EXPORT_SYMBOL(__SCK__pv_queued_spin_unlock);
What do you think about it?
> > > I'm working on riscv qspinlock on sg2042 64 cores 2/4 NUMA nodes > > platforms. Here are the patches about riscv CNA qspinlock: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20230802164701.192791-19-guoren@kernel.org/ > > > > What's the next plan for this patch series? I think the two-queue design > > has satisfied most platforms with two NUMA nodes. > > What has been your reason for working on CNA? What lock has been so > contended you need this? I wrote the reason here: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230802164701.192791-1-guoren@kernel.org/
The target platform is: https://www.sophon.ai/
The two NUMA nodes platform has come out, so we want to measure the benefit of CNA qspinlock.
Any feedbacks are welcome :)
-- Best Regards Guo Ren
| |