xref: /linux/Documentation/arch/arm/vlocks.rst (revision a1c613ae4c322ddd58d5a8539dbfba2a0380a8c0)
1======================================
2vlocks for Bare-Metal Mutual Exclusion
3======================================
4
5Voting Locks, or "vlocks" provide a simple low-level mutual exclusion
6mechanism, with reasonable but minimal requirements on the memory
7system.
8
9These are intended to be used to coordinate critical activity among CPUs
10which are otherwise non-coherent, in situations where the hardware
11provides no other mechanism to support this and ordinary spinlocks
12cannot be used.
13
14
15vlocks make use of the atomicity provided by the memory system for
16writes to a single memory location.  To arbitrate, every CPU "votes for
17itself", by storing a unique number to a common memory location.  The
18final value seen in that memory location when all the votes have been
19cast identifies the winner.
20
21In order to make sure that the election produces an unambiguous result
22in finite time, a CPU will only enter the election in the first place if
23no winner has been chosen and the election does not appear to have
24started yet.
25
26
27Algorithm
28---------
29
30The easiest way to explain the vlocks algorithm is with some pseudo-code::
31
32
33	int currently_voting[NR_CPUS] = { 0, };
34	int last_vote = -1; /* no votes yet */
35
36	bool vlock_trylock(int this_cpu)
37	{
38		/* signal our desire to vote */
39		currently_voting[this_cpu] = 1;
40		if (last_vote != -1) {
41			/* someone already volunteered himself */
42			currently_voting[this_cpu] = 0;
43			return false; /* not ourself */
44		}
45
46		/* let's suggest ourself */
47		last_vote = this_cpu;
48		currently_voting[this_cpu] = 0;
49
50		/* then wait until everyone else is done voting */
51		for_each_cpu(i) {
52			while (currently_voting[i] != 0)
53				/* wait */;
54		}
55
56		/* result */
57		if (last_vote == this_cpu)
58			return true; /* we won */
59		return false;
60	}
61
62	bool vlock_unlock(void)
63	{
64		last_vote = -1;
65	}
66
67
68The currently_voting[] array provides a way for the CPUs to determine
69whether an election is in progress, and plays a role analogous to the
70"entering" array in Lamport's bakery algorithm [1].
71
72However, once the election has started, the underlying memory system
73atomicity is used to pick the winner.  This avoids the need for a static
74priority rule to act as a tie-breaker, or any counters which could
75overflow.
76
77As long as the last_vote variable is globally visible to all CPUs, it
78will contain only one value that won't change once every CPU has cleared
79its currently_voting flag.
80
81
82Features and limitations
83------------------------
84
85 * vlocks are not intended to be fair.  In the contended case, it is the
86   _last_ CPU which attempts to get the lock which will be most likely
87   to win.
88
89   vlocks are therefore best suited to situations where it is necessary
90   to pick a unique winner, but it does not matter which CPU actually
91   wins.
92
93 * Like other similar mechanisms, vlocks will not scale well to a large
94   number of CPUs.
95
96   vlocks can be cascaded in a voting hierarchy to permit better scaling
97   if necessary, as in the following hypothetical example for 4096 CPUs::
98
99	/* first level: local election */
100	my_town = towns[(this_cpu >> 4) & 0xf];
101	I_won = vlock_trylock(my_town, this_cpu & 0xf);
102	if (I_won) {
103		/* we won the town election, let's go for the state */
104		my_state = states[(this_cpu >> 8) & 0xf];
105		I_won = vlock_lock(my_state, this_cpu & 0xf));
106		if (I_won) {
107			/* and so on */
108			I_won = vlock_lock(the_whole_country, this_cpu & 0xf];
109			if (I_won) {
110				/* ... */
111			}
112			vlock_unlock(the_whole_country);
113		}
114		vlock_unlock(my_state);
115	}
116	vlock_unlock(my_town);
117
118
119ARM implementation
120------------------
121
122The current ARM implementation [2] contains some optimisations beyond
123the basic algorithm:
124
125 * By packing the members of the currently_voting array close together,
126   we can read the whole array in one transaction (providing the number
127   of CPUs potentially contending the lock is small enough).  This
128   reduces the number of round-trips required to external memory.
129
130   In the ARM implementation, this means that we can use a single load
131   and comparison::
132
133	LDR	Rt, [Rn]
134	CMP	Rt, #0
135
136   ...in place of code equivalent to::
137
138	LDRB	Rt, [Rn]
139	CMP	Rt, #0
140	LDRBEQ	Rt, [Rn, #1]
141	CMPEQ	Rt, #0
142	LDRBEQ	Rt, [Rn, #2]
143	CMPEQ	Rt, #0
144	LDRBEQ	Rt, [Rn, #3]
145	CMPEQ	Rt, #0
146
147   This cuts down on the fast-path latency, as well as potentially
148   reducing bus contention in contended cases.
149
150   The optimisation relies on the fact that the ARM memory system
151   guarantees coherency between overlapping memory accesses of
152   different sizes, similarly to many other architectures.  Note that
153   we do not care which element of currently_voting appears in which
154   bits of Rt, so there is no need to worry about endianness in this
155   optimisation.
156
157   If there are too many CPUs to read the currently_voting array in
158   one transaction then multiple transactions are still required.  The
159   implementation uses a simple loop of word-sized loads for this
160   case.  The number of transactions is still fewer than would be
161   required if bytes were loaded individually.
162
163
164   In principle, we could aggregate further by using LDRD or LDM, but
165   to keep the code simple this was not attempted in the initial
166   implementation.
167
168
169 * vlocks are currently only used to coordinate between CPUs which are
170   unable to enable their caches yet.  This means that the
171   implementation removes many of the barriers which would be required
172   when executing the algorithm in cached memory.
173
174   packing of the currently_voting array does not work with cached
175   memory unless all CPUs contending the lock are cache-coherent, due
176   to cache writebacks from one CPU clobbering values written by other
177   CPUs.  (Though if all the CPUs are cache-coherent, you should be
178   probably be using proper spinlocks instead anyway).
179
180
181 * The "no votes yet" value used for the last_vote variable is 0 (not
182   -1 as in the pseudocode).  This allows statically-allocated vlocks
183   to be implicitly initialised to an unlocked state simply by putting
184   them in .bss.
185
186   An offset is added to each CPU's ID for the purpose of setting this
187   variable, so that no CPU uses the value 0 for its ID.
188
189
190Colophon
191--------
192
193Originally created and documented by Dave Martin for Linaro Limited, for
194use in ARM-based big.LITTLE platforms, with review and input gratefully
195received from Nicolas Pitre and Achin Gupta.  Thanks to Nicolas for
196grabbing most of this text out of the relevant mail thread and writing
197up the pseudocode.
198
199Copyright (C) 2012-2013  Linaro Limited
200Distributed under the terms of Version 2 of the GNU General Public
201License, as defined in linux/COPYING.
202
203
204References
205----------
206
207[1] Lamport, L. "A New Solution of Dijkstra's Concurrent Programming
208    Problem", Communications of the ACM 17, 8 (August 1974), 453-455.
209
210    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamport%27s_bakery_algorithm
211
212[2] linux/arch/arm/common/vlock.S, www.kernel.org.
213