From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
tglx@linutronix.de, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RT] arm*: disable NEON in kernel mode
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 15:36:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171201143648.GK1612@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171201141827.yip6pl3tt7kxzek7@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>
On 2017-12-01 14:18:28 [+0000], Mark Rutland wrote:
> [Adding Ard, who wrote the NEON crypto code]
>
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 02:45:06PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > +arm folks, to let you know
> >
> > On 2017-12-01 11:43:32 [+0100], To linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org wrote:
> > > NEON in kernel mode is used by the crypto algorithms and raid6 code.
> > > While the raid6 code looks okay, the crypto algorithms do not: NEON
> > > is enabled on first invocation and may allocate/free/map memory before
> > > the NEON mode is disabled again.
>
> Could you elaborate on why this is a problem?
>
> I guess this is because kernel_neon_{begin,end}() disable preemption?
>
> ... is this specific to RT?
It is RT specific, yes. One thing are the unbounded latencies since
everything in this preempt_disable section can take time depending on
the size of the request.
The other thing is code like in
arch/arm64/crypto/aes-ce-ccm-glue.c:ccm_encrypt()
where within this preempt_disable() section skcipher_walk_done() is
invoked. That function can allocate/free/map memory which is okay for
!RT but is not for RT. I tried to break those loops for x86 [0] and I
simply didn't had the time to do the same for ARM. I am aware that
store/restore of the NEON registers (as SSE and AVX) is expensive and
doing a lot of operations in one go is desired. So for x86 I would want
to do some benchmarks and come up with some numbers based on which I
can argue with people one way or another depending on how much it hurts
and how long preemption can be disabled.
[0] https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2663115.html
> Thanks,
> Mark.
Sebastian
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: bigeasy@linutronix.de (Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH RT] arm*: disable NEON in kernel mode
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 15:36:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171201143648.GK1612@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171201141827.yip6pl3tt7kxzek7@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>
On 2017-12-01 14:18:28 [+0000], Mark Rutland wrote:
> [Adding Ard, who wrote the NEON crypto code]
>
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 02:45:06PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > +arm folks, to let you know
> >
> > On 2017-12-01 11:43:32 [+0100], To linux-rt-users at vger.kernel.org wrote:
> > > NEON in kernel mode is used by the crypto algorithms and raid6 code.
> > > While the raid6 code looks okay, the crypto algorithms do not: NEON
> > > is enabled on first invocation and may allocate/free/map memory before
> > > the NEON mode is disabled again.
>
> Could you elaborate on why this is a problem?
>
> I guess this is because kernel_neon_{begin,end}() disable preemption?
>
> ... is this specific to RT?
It is RT specific, yes. One thing are the unbounded latencies since
everything in this preempt_disable section can take time depending on
the size of the request.
The other thing is code like in
arch/arm64/crypto/aes-ce-ccm-glue.c:ccm_encrypt()
where within this preempt_disable() section skcipher_walk_done() is
invoked. That function can allocate/free/map memory which is okay for
!RT but is not for RT. I tried to break those loops for x86 [0] and I
simply didn't had the time to do the same for ARM. I am aware that
store/restore of the NEON registers (as SSE and AVX) is expensive and
doing a lot of operations in one go is desired. So for x86 I would want
to do some benchmarks and come up with some numbers based on which I
can argue with people one way or another depending on how much it hurts
and how long preemption can be disabled.
[0] https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2663115.html
> Thanks,
> Mark.
Sebastian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-01 14:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-30 14:22 [PATCH RT] crypto: limit more FPU-enabled sections Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-11-30 14:30 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-12-01 10:43 ` [PATCH RT] arm*: disable NEON in kernel mode Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-12-01 13:45 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-12-01 13:45 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-12-01 14:18 ` Mark Rutland
2017-12-01 14:18 ` Mark Rutland
2017-12-01 14:36 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2017-12-01 14:36 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-12-01 15:03 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-12-01 15:03 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-12-01 17:58 ` Dave Martin
2017-12-01 17:58 ` Dave Martin
2017-12-01 18:08 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-12-01 18:08 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-12-01 18:24 ` Dave Martin
2017-12-01 18:24 ` Dave Martin
2017-12-01 19:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-12-01 19:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-12-04 9:21 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-12-04 9:21 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-12-01 17:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-01 17:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-01 17:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-12-01 17:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-12-01 17:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-01 17:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-11-30 15:19 ` [PATCH RT] crypto: limit more FPU-enabled sections Steven Rostedt
2017-11-30 15:22 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-12-01 10:44 ` [PATCH RT v2] " Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-12-01 11:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-01 13:32 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-12-01 13:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-01 13:50 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-12-01 14:03 ` [PATCH RT v3] " Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-11-30 15:29 ` [PATCH RT] " Steven Rostedt
2017-11-30 15:41 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-11-30 16:18 ` Steven Rostedt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20171201143648.GK1612@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.