Skip to content

R
riscv-gcc-1
Commit e7f7330f by Torvald Riegel Committed by Torvald Riegel
Options

libitm: Use multiplicative hashing in the multi-lock TM method. 

	* method-ml.cc (ml_mg): Use multiplicative instead of simple hashing.
	(ml_wt_dispatch::pre_write): Adapt.
	(ml_wt_dispatch::pre_load): Likewise.

From-SVN: r230975
parent 43a2362b
Showing with 61 additions and 29 deletions
libitm/ChangeLog
2015-11-26 Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>
* method-ml.cc (ml_mg): Use multiplicative instead of simple hashing.
(ml_wt_dispatch::pre_write): Adapt.
(ml_wt_dispatch::pre_load): Likewise.
2015-11-22 Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>
* libitm_i.h (gtm_alloc_action): Remove union.
......
libitm/method-ml.cc
......@@ -69,23 +69,51 @@ struct ml_mg : public method_group
atomic<gtm_word>* orecs __attribute__((aligned(HW_CACHELINE_SIZE)));
char tailpadding[HW_CACHELINE_SIZE - sizeof(atomic<gtm_word>*)];
// Location-to-orec mapping. Stripes of 16B mapped to 2^19 orecs.
static const gtm_word L2O_ORECS = 1 << 19;
static const gtm_word L2O_SHIFT = 4;
static size_t get_orec(const void* addr)
// Location-to-orec mapping. Stripes of 32B mapped to 2^16 orecs using
// multiplicative hashing. See Section 5.2.2 of Torvald Riegel's PhD thesis
// for the background on this choice of hash function and parameters:
// http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:14-qucosa-115596
// We pick the Mult32 hash because it works well with fewer orecs (i.e.,
// less space overhead and just 32b multiplication).
// We may want to check and potentially change these settings once we get
// better or just more benchmarks.
static const gtm_word L2O_ORECS_BITS = 16;
static const gtm_word L2O_ORECS = 1 << L2O_ORECS_BITS;
// An iterator over the orecs covering the region [addr,addr+len).
struct orec_iterator
{
return ((uintptr_t)addr >> L2O_SHIFT) & (L2O_ORECS - 1);
}
static size_t get_next_orec(size_t orec)
{
return (orec + 1) & (L2O_ORECS - 1);
}
// Returns the next orec after the region.
static size_t get_orec_end(const void* addr, size_t len)
{
return (((uintptr_t)addr + len + (1 << L2O_SHIFT) - 1) >> L2O_SHIFT)
& (L2O_ORECS - 1);
}
static const gtm_word L2O_SHIFT = 5;
static const uint32_t L2O_MULT32 = 81007;
uint32_t mult;
size_t orec;
size_t orec_end;
orec_iterator (const void* addr, size_t len)
{
uint32_t a = (uintptr_t) addr >> L2O_SHIFT;
uint32_t ae = ((uintptr_t) addr + len + (1 << L2O_SHIFT) - 1)
>> L2O_SHIFT;
mult = a * L2O_MULT32;
orec = mult >> (32 - L2O_ORECS_BITS);
// We can't really avoid this second multiplication unless we use a
// branch instead or know more about the alignment of addr. (We often
// know len at compile time because of instantiations of functions
// such as _ITM_RU* for accesses of specific lengths.
orec_end = (ae * L2O_MULT32) >> (32 - L2O_ORECS_BITS);
}
size_t get() { return orec; }
void advance()
{
// We cannot simply increment orec because L2O_MULT32 is larger than
// 1 << (32 - L2O_ORECS_BITS), and thus an increase of the stripe (i.e.,
// addr >> L2O_SHIFT) could increase the resulting orec index by more
// than one; with the current parameters, we would roughly acquire a
// fourth more orecs than necessary for regions covering more than orec.
// Keeping mult around as extra state shouldn't matter much.
mult += L2O_MULT32;
orec = mult >> (32 - L2O_ORECS_BITS);
}
bool reached_end() { return orec == orec_end; }
};
virtual void init()
{
......@@ -142,14 +170,13 @@ protected:
gtm_word locked_by_tx = ml_mg::set_locked(tx);
// Lock all orecs that cover the region.
size_t orec = ml_mg::get_orec(addr);
size_t orec_end = ml_mg::get_orec_end(addr, len);
ml_mg::orec_iterator oi(addr, len);
do
{
// Load the orec. Relaxed memory order is sufficient here because
// either we have acquired the orec or we will try to acquire it with
// a CAS with stronger memory order.
gtm_word o = o_ml_mg.orecs[orec].load(memory_order_relaxed);
gtm_word o = o_ml_mg.orecs[oi.get()].load(memory_order_relaxed);
// Check whether we have acquired the orec already.
if (likely (locked_by_tx != o))
......@@ -175,7 +202,7 @@ protected:
// because whenever another thread reads from this CAS'
// modification, then it will abort anyway and does not rely on
// any further happens-before relation to be established.
if (unlikely (!o_ml_mg.orecs[orec].compare_exchange_strong(
if (unlikely (!o_ml_mg.orecs[oi.get()].compare_exchange_strong(
o, locked_by_tx, memory_order_acquire)))
tx->restart(RESTART_LOCKED_WRITE);
......@@ -192,12 +219,12 @@ protected:
// numbers when we have to roll back.
// ??? Reserve capacity early to avoid capacity checks here?
gtm_rwlog_entry *e = tx->writelog.push();
e->orec = o_ml_mg.orecs + orec;
e->orec = o_ml_mg.orecs + oi.get();
e->value = o;
}
orec = o_ml_mg.get_next_orec(orec);
oi.advance();
}
while (orec != orec_end);
while (!oi.reached_end());
// Do undo logging. We do not know which region prior writes logged
// (even if orecs have been acquired), so just log everything.
......@@ -275,8 +302,7 @@ protected:
gtm_word snapshot = tx->shared_state.load(memory_order_relaxed);
gtm_word locked_by_tx = ml_mg::set_locked(tx);
size_t orec = ml_mg::get_orec(addr);
size_t orec_end = ml_mg::get_orec_end(addr, len);
ml_mg::orec_iterator oi(addr, len);
do
{
// We need acquire memory order here so that this load will
......@@ -284,13 +310,13 @@ protected:
// In turn, this makes sure that subsequent data loads will read from
// a visible sequence of side effects that starts with the most recent
// store to the data right before the release of the orec.
gtm_word o = o_ml_mg.orecs[orec].load(memory_order_acquire);
gtm_word o = o_ml_mg.orecs[oi.get()].load(memory_order_acquire);
if (likely (!ml_mg::is_more_recent_or_locked(o, snapshot)))
{
success:
gtm_rwlog_entry *e = tx->readlog.push();
e->orec = o_ml_mg.orecs + orec;
e->orec = o_ml_mg.orecs + oi.get();
e->value = o;
}
else if (!ml_mg::is_locked(o))
......@@ -308,9 +334,9 @@ protected:
if (o != locked_by_tx)
tx->restart(RESTART_LOCKED_READ);
}
orec = o_ml_mg.get_next_orec(orec);
oi.advance();
}
while (orec != orec_end);
while (!oi.reached_end());
return &tx->readlog[log_start];
}
......
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment