[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] 3405: Add ast_spinlock capability

rmudgett reviewboard at asterisk.org
Fri Apr 18 16:45:42 CDT 2014 

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3405/#review11697
-----------------------------------------------------------



branches/12/include/asterisk/spinlock.h
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3405/#comment21464>

    Spinlocks are useless on a non-multicore machines.  The assembly versions should have some check to see if the machine the code is being built for is multicore.



branches/12/include/asterisk/spinlock.h
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3405/#comment21462>

    Always use curly braces.



branches/12/include/asterisk/spinlock.h
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3405/#comment21463>

    Curlies



branches/12/include/asterisk/spinlock.h
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3405/#comment21465>

    I suppose a comment saying the below prototypes are to ensure that the spinlock implementations above provice the same API.


- rmudgett


On April 17, 2014, 12:26 p.m., George Joseph wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3405/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated April 17, 2014, 12:26 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers, Corey Farrell, Joshua Colp, and rmudgett.
> 
> 
> Bugs: ASTERISK-23553
>     https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-23553
> 
> 
> Repository: Asterisk
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Now ready for prime time...
> 
> This patch adds support for spinlocks in Asterisk.
> 
> There are cases in Asterisk where it might be desirable to lock a short critical code section but not incur the context switch and yield penalty of a mutex or rwlock.  The primary spinlock implementations execute exclusively in userspace and therefore don't incur those penalties.  Spinlocks are NOT meant to be a general replacement for mutexes.  They should be used only for protecting short blocks of critical code such as simple compares and assignments.  Operations that may block, hold a lock, or cause the thread to give up it's timeslice should NEVER be attempted in a spinlock.
> 
> The first use case for spinlocks is in astobj2 - internal_ao2_ref.  Currently the manipulation of the reference counter is done with an ast_atomic_fetchadd_int which works fine.  When weak reference containers are introduced however, there's an additional comparison and assignment that'll need to be done while the lock is held.  A mutex would be way too expensive here, hence the spinlock.  Given that lock contention in this situation would be infrequent, the overhead of the spinlock is only a few more machine instructions than the current ast_atomic_fetchadd_int call.
> 
> 7 implementations were tested on various i366, x86_64, ARM and Sparc platforms running Linux, FreeBSD, OSX and Solaris.  The test suite and results can be found here... https://github.com/gtjoseph/spintest
> 
> Summary...
> 
> Tested various spinlock implementations. 
> 
> + GCC Atomics      		gcc_atomics
> + x86 assembly     		gas_x86
> + ARM assembly     		gas_arm
> + Sparc assembly     		gas_sparc
> + OSX Atomics      		osx_atomics
> + pthreads spinlock		pthread_spinlock
> + pthreads mutex   		pthread_mutex
> + pthreads adaptive mutex       pthread_mutex_adaptive_np
> 
> Not all implementations were available on all platforms.  For instance, the gas_x86 implementation won't be available on an arm or sparc platform.
> 
> Each implementation was tested with the same locking scenario which is a short block of compares and assignments representing the most anticipated Asterisk use cases.  The test case was run in a tight loop of 25,000,000 iterations executed in parallel by 1..5 simultaneous threads.
> 
> The test suite was run on the following platforms:
> 
> + Darwin-OSX-x86_64-2core
> + FreeBSD-BSD-amd64-4core
> + FreeBSD-BSD-i386-1core
> + Linux-CentOS-i686-1core
> + Linux-Debian-i686-4core
> + Linux-Debian-x86_64-4core
> + Linux-Fedora-armv7l-1core
> + Linux-Fedora-i686-1core
> + Linux-Fedora-x86_64-12core
> + Linux-Fedora-x86_64-1core
> + Linux-Fedora-x86_64-2core
> + Linux-Fedora-x86_64-4core
> + Linux-Fedora-x86_64-8core
> + Linux-Gentoo-sparc64-32core
> + SunOS-Solaris-i86pc-4core
> 
> For each platform tested, the real, user and system times were captured in csv form and the final real and system times graphed.
> 
> Observations:
> 
> + The GCC Atomics implementation was available on all platforms and generally had the best performance.
> + The native assembly implementations generally performed on par with the GCC Atomics implementation.
> + The pthread_spinlock implementation was not available on Darwin but performed well on the other platforms.
> + The OSX Atomics implementation performed well on Darwin.
> + The pthread_mutex_adaptive implementation was not available on all platforms and it's performance was noticeably worse on the supported platforms.
> + The pthread_mutex implementation was available on all platforms but clearly showed the effects of context switching (high sys time) as lock contention grew.
> 
> Conclusions:
> 
> + GCC Atomics should be the first implementation choice.
> + The native assembly implementations should be the second choices.
> + The pthread_spinlock implementation should be the third choice on non-Darwin platforms.
> + OSX Atomics should be the third choice on Darwin.
> + The pthread_mutex_adaptive implementation should be eliminated.
> + The pthread_mutex implementation should be the implementation of last resort.
> + If none of the implementations are available, a compilation #error will be raised.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   branches/12/include/asterisk/spinlock.h PRE-CREATION 
>   branches/12/include/asterisk/autoconfig.h.in 412427 
>   branches/12/configure.ac 412427 
>   branches/12/configure UNKNOWN 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3405/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> See above.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> George Joseph
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20140418/c5490c9e/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the asterisk-dev mailing list