All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, cl@linux.com,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
	Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
	James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
	Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Sandeep Patil <sspatil@android.com>,
	Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
	Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] net: apply __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT to AF_UNIX sk_buff allocations
Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 17:26:09 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201905161714.A53D472D9@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201905160923.BD3E530EFC@keescook>

On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 09:53:01AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 04:35:37PM +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> > Add sock_alloc_send_pskb_noinit(), which is similar to
> > sock_alloc_send_pskb(), but allocates with __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT.
> > This helps reduce the slowdown on hackbench in the init_on_alloc mode
> > from 6.84% to 3.45%.
> 
> Out of curiosity, why the creation of the new function over adding a
> gfp flag argument to sock_alloc_send_pskb() and updating callers? (There
> are only 6 callers, and this change already updates 2 of those.)
> 
> > Slowdown for the initialization features compared to init_on_free=0,
> > init_on_alloc=0:
> > 
> > hackbench, init_on_free=1:  +7.71% sys time (st.err 0.45%)
> > hackbench, init_on_alloc=1: +3.45% sys time (st.err 0.86%)

So I've run some of my own wall-clock timings of kernel builds (which
should be an pretty big "worst case" situation, and I see much smaller
performance changes:

everything off
	Run times: 289.18 288.61 289.66 287.71 287.67
	Min: 287.67 Max: 289.66 Mean: 288.57 Std Dev: 0.79
		baseline

init_on_alloc=1
	Run times: 289.72 286.95 287.87 287.34 287.35
	Min: 286.95 Max: 289.72 Mean: 287.85 Std Dev: 0.98
		0.25% faster (within the std dev noise)

init_on_free=1
	Run times: 303.26 301.44 301.19 301.55 301.39
	Min: 301.19 Max: 303.26 Mean: 301.77 Std Dev: 0.75
		4.57% slower

init_on_free=1 with the PAX_MEMORY_SANITIZE slabs excluded:
	Run times: 299.19 299.85 298.95 298.23 298.64
	Min: 298.23 Max: 299.85 Mean: 298.97 Std Dev: 0.55
		3.60% slower

So the tuning certainly improved things by 1%. My perf numbers don't
show the 24% hit you were seeing at all, though.

> In the commit log it might be worth mentioning that this is only
> changing the init_on_alloc case (in case it's not already obvious to
> folks). Perhaps there needs to be a split of __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT into
> __GFP_NO_AUTO_ALLOC_INIT and __GFP_NO_AUTO_FREE_INIT? Right now
> __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT is only checked for init_on_alloc:

I was obviously crazy here. :) GFP isn't present for free(), but a SLAB
flag works (as was done in PAX_MEMORY_SANITIZE). I'll send the patch I
used for the above timing test.

-- 
Kees Cook

  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-17  0:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-14 14:35 [PATCH v2 0/4] RFC: add init_on_alloc/init_on_free boot options Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-14 14:35 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] mm: security: introduce init_on_alloc=1 and init_on_free=1 " Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-16 16:19   ` Kees Cook
2019-05-16 16:42     ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-16 17:03       ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17  1:26   ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17 14:38     ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 14:04   ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-17 14:11     ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 14:20       ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-17 16:36         ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17 17:11           ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-14 14:35 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] lib: introduce test_meminit module Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-16  1:02   ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17 15:51     ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 16:37       ` Kees Cook
2019-05-14 14:35 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] gfp: mm: introduce __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 12:59   ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-17 13:18     ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 13:25       ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-17 13:37         ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 14:01           ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-17 16:27             ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17 17:11               ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-21 14:18                 ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-21 14:25                   ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-14 14:35 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] net: apply __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT to AF_UNIX sk_buff allocations Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-16 16:53   ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17  0:26     ` Kees Cook [this message]
2019-05-17  8:49       ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 13:50         ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 16:13         ` Kees Cook
2019-05-17  0:50   ` [PATCH 5/4] mm: Introduce SLAB_NO_FREE_INIT and mark excluded caches Kees Cook
2019-05-17  8:34     ` Alexander Potapenko
2019-05-17 15:59       ` Kees Cook
2019-05-20  6:10     ` Mathias Krause
2019-05-20 16:12       ` Kees Cook

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=201905161714.A53D472D9@keescook \
    --to=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=glider@google.com \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=kcc@google.com \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=labbott@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.com \
    --cc=sspatil@android.com \
    --cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.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.