All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Jan Glauber <jglauber@marvell.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Jayachandran Chandrasekharan Nair <jnair@marvell.com>,
	Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] arm64: kernel: implement fast refcount checking
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 09:43:54 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201907220942.69F916657@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190710122117.kk5xgei56r7vfmmj@willie-the-truck>

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 01:21:18PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 08:12:12PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > There was a lot of pushback against the use of refcount_t in the
> > beginning, given that the checked flavor was slower than unchecked
> > atomic_t, and IIRC, it was mainly the networking folks that opposed
> > it. So the whole idea is that the code performs as closely to atomic_t
> > as possible, which is why the code is simply the atomic_t asm
> > implementations, but with a -s suffix added to the arithmetic
> > instructions so they set PSTATE, and one or two conditional branch
> > instructions added.
> > 
> > Your approach is going to require one or two additional compare
> > instructions, increasing the instruction count. This may not matter on
> > fast OoO cores, but it probably will affect somebody's benchmark
> > somewhere.
> > 
> > However, I'd be in favour of switching to your code, since it is much
> > simpler and more maintainable, so if you spin it as a proper patch, we
> > can do some comparative analysis of the performance.
> 
> I'll post the patches after the merge window, but I've pushed them here in
> the meantime in case anybody gets a chance to take them for a spin:
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/will/linux.git/log/?h=refcount/full

Can the last patch get split up a bit? There's the inlining move, then
there is the atomic_fetch*() changes. Putting that all in one patch
makes the series a bit harder to review.

(Also, what happened to the *_checked() variations?)

-- 
Kees Cook

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-07-22 16:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-19 10:54 [PATCH v5] arm64: kernel: implement fast refcount checking Ard Biesheuvel
2019-06-19 10:56 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-06-20 11:03   ` Jan Glauber
2019-06-20 18:10 ` Kees Cook
2019-06-24  6:37 ` Hanjun Guo
2019-07-03 13:40 ` Will Deacon
2019-07-03 18:12   ` Ard Biesheuvel
2019-07-10 12:21     ` Will Deacon
2019-07-15 12:44       ` Jan Glauber
2019-07-17 12:53       ` Hanjun Guo
2019-07-17 13:23       ` Hanjun Guo
2019-07-22 16:43       ` Kees Cook [this message]
2019-07-22 17:11         ` Will Deacon
2019-07-22 17:27           ` Kees Cook
2019-07-29 17:24             ` Will Deacon
2019-07-29 21:38               ` 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=201907220942.69F916657@keescook \
    --to=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
    --cc=jglauber@marvell.com \
    --cc=jnair@marvell.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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.