Use gcc built-in atomic inc/dec in lock.c - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Mikko Tiihonen |
---|---|
Subject | Use gcc built-in atomic inc/dec in lock.c |
Date | |
Msg-id | 50C900FD.70707@nitorcreations.com Whole thread Raw |
Responses |
Re: Use gcc built-in atomic inc/dec in lock.c
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, I noticed a "XXX: It might be worth considering using an atomic fetch-and-add instruction here, on architectures where that is supported." in lock.c Here is my first try at using it. The patch adds a configure check for gcc 4.7 __atomic_add_fetch as well as the older __sync_add_and_fetch built-ins. If either is available they are used instead of the mutex. Changes do the following: - declare atomic_inc and atomic_dec inline functions (implemented either using GCC built-in functions or the old mutex code) in new atomics.h - change lock.c to use atomic_* functions instead of explicit mutex - moved all other assignments inside the mutex to occur before the atomic operation so that the barrier of the atomic operation can guarantee the stores are visible when the function ends - removed one assert that could not easily be implemented with atomic_dec in RemoveLocalLock Using method AbortStrongLockAcquire as an example. When compiling with Fedora GCC 4.7.2 the following assembly code is generated Original code before the patch: 136 bytes Mutex code with the patch: 124 bytes Code with gcc-built-ins: 56 bytes I think moving the extra assignments outside the mutex has allowed the compiler to optimize the code more even when the mutex is used. Questions: 1) is it safe to move the assignments to locallock->holdsStrongLockCount and StrongLockInProgress outside the FastPathStrongRelationLocks? 2) With built-ins the FastPathStrongRelationLockData becomes uint32[1024], should we add back some padding to reduce the cacheline collisions? For a modern cpu using 64 byte cache lines there can be only max 16 concurrent updates at the and the propability of collision is quite big 3) What kind of pgbench test would utilise the code path the most? TODO: 1) add check in configure.in to ensure that the built-ins are not converted to external calls by gcc (on architectures that use the gcc generic version) 2) other architectures / compilers ------ Original code before the patch: 0000000000000e10 <AbortStrongLockAcquire>: e10: 48 89 5c 24 f0 mov %rbx,-0x10(%rsp) e15: 48 89 6c 24 f8 mov %rbp,-0x8(%rsp) e1a: 48 83 ec 18 sub $0x18,%rsp e1e: 48 8b 1d 00 00 00 00 mov 0x0(%rip),%rbx # e25 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x15> e25: 48 85 db test %rbx,%rbx e28: 74 41 je e6b <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x5b> e2a: 8b 6b 28 mov 0x28(%rbx),%ebp e2d: b8 01 00 00 00 mov $0x1,%eax e32: 48 8b 15 00 00 00 00 mov 0x0(%rip),%rdx # e39 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x29> e39: 81 e5 ff 03 00 00 and $0x3ff,%ebp e3f: f0 86 02 lock xchg %al,(%rdx) e42: 84 c0 test %al,%al e44: 75 3a jne e80 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x70> e46: 48 8b 05 00 00 00 00 mov 0x0(%rip),%rax # e4d <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x3d> e4d: 48 c7 05 00 00 00 00 movq $0x0,0x0(%rip) # e58 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x48> e54: 00 00 00 00 e58: 83 6c a8 04 01 subl $0x1,0x4(%rax,%rbp,4) e5d: c6 43 40 00 movb $0x0,0x40(%rbx) e61: 48 8b 05 00 00 00 00 mov 0x0(%rip),%rax # e68 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x58> e68: c6 00 00 movb $0x0,(%rax) e6b: 48 8b 5c 24 08 mov 0x8(%rsp),%rbx e70: 48 8b 6c 24 10 mov 0x10(%rsp),%rbp e75: 48 83 c4 18 add $0x18,%rsp e79: c3 retq e7a: 66 0f 1f 44 00 00 nopw 0x0(%rax,%rax,1) e80: 48 8b 3d 00 00 00 00 mov 0x0(%rip),%rdi # e87 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x77> e87: ba a8 05 00 00 mov $0x5a8,%edx e8c: be 00 00 00 00 mov $0x0,%esi e91: e8 00 00 00 00 callq e96 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x86> e96: eb ae jmp e46 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x36> e98: 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 nopl 0x0(%rax,%rax,1) e9f: 00 Mutex code with the patch: 0000000000000e00 <AbortStrongLockAcquire>: e00: 48 8b 05 00 00 00 00 mov 0x0(%rip),%rax # e07 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x7> e07: 48 85 c0 test %rax,%rax e0a: 74 55 je e61 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x61> e0c: 48 89 5c 24 f0 mov %rbx,-0x10(%rsp) e11: 48 89 6c 24 f8 mov %rbp,-0x8(%rsp) e16: 48 83 ec 18 sub $0x18,%rsp e1a: 8b 68 28 mov 0x28(%rax),%ebp e1d: c6 40 40 00 movb $0x0,0x40(%rax) e21: b8 01 00 00 00 mov $0x1,%eax e26: 48 c7 05 00 00 00 00 movq $0x0,0x0(%rip) # e31 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x31> e2d: 00 00 00 00 e31: 48 8b 1d 00 00 00 00 mov 0x0(%rip),%rbx # e38 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x38> e38: 81 e5 ff 03 00 00 and $0x3ff,%ebp e3e: f0 86 03 lock xchg %al,(%rbx) e41: 84 c0 test %al,%al e43: 75 23 jne e68 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x68> e45: 8b 44 ab 04 mov 0x4(%rbx,%rbp,4),%eax e49: 83 e8 01 sub $0x1,%eax e4c: 89 44 ab 04 mov %eax,0x4(%rbx,%rbp,4) e50: c6 03 00 movb $0x0,(%rbx) e53: 48 8b 5c 24 08 mov 0x8(%rsp),%rbx e58: 48 8b 6c 24 10 mov 0x10(%rsp),%rbp e5d: 48 83 c4 18 add $0x18,%rsp e61: f3 c3 repz retq e63: 0f 1f 44 00 00 nopl 0x0(%rax,%rax,1) e68: ba 41 00 00 00 mov $0x41,%edx e6d: be 00 00 00 00 mov $0x0,%esi e72: 48 89 df mov %rbx,%rdi e75: e8 00 00 00 00 callq e7a <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x7a> e7a: eb c9 jmp e45 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x45> e7c: 0f 1f 40 00 nopl 0x0(%rax) Code with gcc-built-ins: 0000000000000da0 <AbortStrongLockAcquire>: da0: 48 8b 05 00 00 00 00 mov 0x0(%rip),%rax # da7 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x7> da7: 48 85 c0 test %rax,%rax daa: 74 2a je dd6 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x36> dac: 8b 50 28 mov 0x28(%rax),%edx daf: c6 40 40 00 movb $0x0,0x40(%rax) db3: 48 c7 05 00 00 00 00 movq $0x0,0x0(%rip) # dbe <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x1e> dba: 00 00 00 00 dbe: 48 89 d0 mov %rdx,%rax dc1: 48 8b 15 00 00 00 00 mov 0x0(%rip),%rdx # dc8 <AbortStrongLockAcquire+0x28> dc8: 25 ff 03 00 00 and $0x3ff,%eax dcd: 48 c1 e0 02 shl $0x2,%rax dd1: f0 83 2c 02 01 lock subl $0x1,(%rdx,%rax,1) dd6: f3 c3 repz retq dd8: 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 nopl 0x0(%rax,%rax,1) ddf: 00
Attachment
pgsql-hackers by date: