aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorEmilio G. Cota <cota@braap.org>2017-07-26 16:58:05 -0400
committerRichard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>2018-06-15 07:42:55 -1000
commitbe2cdc5e352eb28b4ff631f053a261d91e6af78e (patch)
tree8c1a51b0f20bbff2ee2f26badf8e8fe4bec46196 /accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c
parent32359d529f30bea8124ed671b2e6a22f22540488 (diff)
downloadqemu-be2cdc5e352eb28b4ff631f053a261d91e6af78e.zip
qemu-be2cdc5e352eb28b4ff631f053a261d91e6af78e.tar.gz
qemu-be2cdc5e352eb28b4ff631f053a261d91e6af78e.tar.bz2
tcg: track TBs with per-region BST's
This paves the way for enabling scalable parallel generation of TCG code. Instead of tracking TBs with a single binary search tree (BST), use a BST for each TCG region, protecting it with a lock. This is as scalable as it gets, since each TCG thread operates on a separate region. The core of this change is the introduction of struct tcg_region_tree, which contains a pointer to a GTree and an associated lock to serialize accesses to it. We then allocate an array of tcg_region_tree's, adding the appropriate padding to avoid false sharing based on qemu_dcache_linesize. Given a tc_ptr, we first find the corresponding region_tree. This is done by special-casing the first and last regions first, since they might be of size != region.size; otherwise we just divide the offset by region.stride. I was worried about this division (several dozen cycles of latency), but profiling shows that this is not a fast path. Note that region.stride is not required to be a power of two; it is only required to be a multiple of the host's page size. Note that with this design we can also provide consistent snapshots about all region trees at once; for instance, tcg_tb_foreach acquires/releases all region_tree locks before/after iterating over them. For this reason we now drop tb_lock in dump_exec_info(). As an alternative I considered implementing a concurrent BST, but this can be tricky to get right, offers no consistent snapshots of the BST, and performance and scalability-wise I don't think it could ever beat having separate GTrees, given that our workload is insert-mostly (all concurrent BST designs I've seen focus, understandably, on making lookups fast, which comes at the expense of convoluted, non-wait-free insertions/removals). Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Emilio G. Cota <cota@braap.org> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c')
-rw-r--r--accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c2
1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c b/accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c
index 6d6c51b..7570c59 100644
--- a/accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c
+++ b/accel/tcg/cpu-exec.c
@@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ static void cpu_exec_nocache(CPUState *cpu, int max_cycles,
tb_lock();
tb_phys_invalidate(tb, -1);
- tb_remove(tb);
+ tcg_tb_remove(tb);
tb_unlock();
}
#endif