From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
To: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Branislav Rankov <Branislav.Rankov@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@google.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>,
Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] kasan: always inline HW_TAGS helper functions
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 16:51:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YBrGcY/DS1GnilYo@elver.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <05a45017b4cb15344395650e880bbab0fe6ba3e4.1612208222.git.andreyknvl@google.com>
On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 08:43PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Mark all static functions in common.c and kasan.h that are used for
> hardware tag-based KASAN as __always_inline to avoid unnecessary
> function calls.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
Does objtool complain about any of these?
I'm not sure this is unconditionally a good idea. If there isn't a
quantifiable performance bug or case where we cannot call a function,
perhaps we can just let the compiler decide?
More comments below.
> ---
> mm/kasan/common.c | 13 +++++++------
> mm/kasan/kasan.h | 6 +++---
> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/kasan/common.c b/mm/kasan/common.c
> index 5691cca69397..2004ecd6e43c 100644
> --- a/mm/kasan/common.c
> +++ b/mm/kasan/common.c
> @@ -279,7 +279,8 @@ void __kasan_poison_object_data(struct kmem_cache *cache, void *object)
> * based on objects indexes, so that objects that are next to each other
> * get different tags.
> */
> -static u8 assign_tag(struct kmem_cache *cache, const void *object, bool init)
> +static __always_inline u8 assign_tag(struct kmem_cache *cache,
> + const void *object, bool init)
This function might be small enough that it's fine.
> {
> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KASAN_GENERIC))
> return 0xff;
> @@ -321,8 +322,8 @@ void * __must_check __kasan_init_slab_obj(struct kmem_cache *cache,
> return (void *)object;
> }
>
> -static bool ____kasan_slab_free(struct kmem_cache *cache, void *object,
> - unsigned long ip, bool quarantine)
> +static __always_inline bool ____kasan_slab_free(struct kmem_cache *cache,
> + void *object, unsigned long ip, bool quarantine)
> {
Because ____kasan_slab_free() is tail-called by __kasan_slab_free() and
__kasan_slab_free_mempool(), there should never be a call (and if there
is we need to figure out why). The additional code-bloat and I-cache
pressure might be worse vs. just a jump. I'd let the compiler decide.
> u8 tag;
> void *tagged_object;
> @@ -366,7 +367,7 @@ bool __kasan_slab_free(struct kmem_cache *cache, void *object, unsigned long ip)
> return ____kasan_slab_free(cache, object, ip, true);
> }
>
> -static bool ____kasan_kfree_large(void *ptr, unsigned long ip)
> +static __always_inline bool ____kasan_kfree_large(void *ptr, unsigned long ip)
> {
This one is tail-called by __kasan_kfree_large(). The usage in
__kasan_slab_free_mempool() is in an unlikely branch.
> if (ptr != page_address(virt_to_head_page(ptr))) {
> kasan_report_invalid_free(ptr, ip);
> @@ -461,8 +462,8 @@ void * __must_check __kasan_slab_alloc(struct kmem_cache *cache,
> return tagged_object;
> }
>
> -static void *____kasan_kmalloc(struct kmem_cache *cache, const void *object,
> - size_t size, gfp_t flags)
> +static __always_inline void *____kasan_kmalloc(struct kmem_cache *cache,
> + const void *object, size_t size, gfp_t flags)
> {
Also only tail-called.
> unsigned long redzone_start;
> unsigned long redzone_end;
> diff --git a/mm/kasan/kasan.h b/mm/kasan/kasan.h
> index 2f7400a3412f..d5fe72747a53 100644
> --- a/mm/kasan/kasan.h
> +++ b/mm/kasan/kasan.h
> @@ -321,7 +321,7 @@ static inline u8 kasan_random_tag(void) { return 0; }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_KASAN_HW_TAGS
>
> -static inline void kasan_poison(const void *addr, size_t size, u8 value)
> +static __always_inline void kasan_poison(const void *addr, size_t size, u8 value)
> {
> addr = kasan_reset_tag(addr);
>
> @@ -337,7 +337,7 @@ static inline void kasan_poison(const void *addr, size_t size, u8 value)
> hw_set_mem_tag_range((void *)addr, size, value);
> }
>
> -static inline void kasan_unpoison(const void *addr, size_t size)
> +static __always_inline void kasan_unpoison(const void *addr, size_t size)
> {
Not sure about these 2. They should be small, but it's hard to say what
is ideal on which architecture.
> u8 tag = get_tag(addr);
>
> @@ -354,7 +354,7 @@ static inline void kasan_unpoison(const void *addr, size_t size)
> hw_set_mem_tag_range((void *)addr, size, tag);
> }
>
> -static inline bool kasan_byte_accessible(const void *addr)
> +static __always_inline bool kasan_byte_accessible(const void *addr)
This function feels like a macro and if the compiler uninlined it, we
could argue it's a bug. But not sure if we need the __always_inline,
unless you've seen this uninlined.
> {
> u8 ptr_tag = get_tag(addr);
> u8 mem_tag = hw_get_mem_tag((void *)addr);
> --
> 2.30.0.365.g02bc693789-goog
>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
To: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@google.com>,
Branislav Rankov <Branislav.Rankov@arm.com>,
Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@arm.com>,
kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] kasan: always inline HW_TAGS helper functions
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 16:51:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YBrGcY/DS1GnilYo@elver.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <05a45017b4cb15344395650e880bbab0fe6ba3e4.1612208222.git.andreyknvl@google.com>
On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 08:43PM +0100, Andrey Konovalov wrote:
> Mark all static functions in common.c and kasan.h that are used for
> hardware tag-based KASAN as __always_inline to avoid unnecessary
> function calls.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>
Does objtool complain about any of these?
I'm not sure this is unconditionally a good idea. If there isn't a
quantifiable performance bug or case where we cannot call a function,
perhaps we can just let the compiler decide?
More comments below.
> ---
> mm/kasan/common.c | 13 +++++++------
> mm/kasan/kasan.h | 6 +++---
> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/kasan/common.c b/mm/kasan/common.c
> index 5691cca69397..2004ecd6e43c 100644
> --- a/mm/kasan/common.c
> +++ b/mm/kasan/common.c
> @@ -279,7 +279,8 @@ void __kasan_poison_object_data(struct kmem_cache *cache, void *object)
> * based on objects indexes, so that objects that are next to each other
> * get different tags.
> */
> -static u8 assign_tag(struct kmem_cache *cache, const void *object, bool init)
> +static __always_inline u8 assign_tag(struct kmem_cache *cache,
> + const void *object, bool init)
This function might be small enough that it's fine.
> {
> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KASAN_GENERIC))
> return 0xff;
> @@ -321,8 +322,8 @@ void * __must_check __kasan_init_slab_obj(struct kmem_cache *cache,
> return (void *)object;
> }
>
> -static bool ____kasan_slab_free(struct kmem_cache *cache, void *object,
> - unsigned long ip, bool quarantine)
> +static __always_inline bool ____kasan_slab_free(struct kmem_cache *cache,
> + void *object, unsigned long ip, bool quarantine)
> {
Because ____kasan_slab_free() is tail-called by __kasan_slab_free() and
__kasan_slab_free_mempool(), there should never be a call (and if there
is we need to figure out why). The additional code-bloat and I-cache
pressure might be worse vs. just a jump. I'd let the compiler decide.
> u8 tag;
> void *tagged_object;
> @@ -366,7 +367,7 @@ bool __kasan_slab_free(struct kmem_cache *cache, void *object, unsigned long ip)
> return ____kasan_slab_free(cache, object, ip, true);
> }
>
> -static bool ____kasan_kfree_large(void *ptr, unsigned long ip)
> +static __always_inline bool ____kasan_kfree_large(void *ptr, unsigned long ip)
> {
This one is tail-called by __kasan_kfree_large(). The usage in
__kasan_slab_free_mempool() is in an unlikely branch.
> if (ptr != page_address(virt_to_head_page(ptr))) {
> kasan_report_invalid_free(ptr, ip);
> @@ -461,8 +462,8 @@ void * __must_check __kasan_slab_alloc(struct kmem_cache *cache,
> return tagged_object;
> }
>
> -static void *____kasan_kmalloc(struct kmem_cache *cache, const void *object,
> - size_t size, gfp_t flags)
> +static __always_inline void *____kasan_kmalloc(struct kmem_cache *cache,
> + const void *object, size_t size, gfp_t flags)
> {
Also only tail-called.
> unsigned long redzone_start;
> unsigned long redzone_end;
> diff --git a/mm/kasan/kasan.h b/mm/kasan/kasan.h
> index 2f7400a3412f..d5fe72747a53 100644
> --- a/mm/kasan/kasan.h
> +++ b/mm/kasan/kasan.h
> @@ -321,7 +321,7 @@ static inline u8 kasan_random_tag(void) { return 0; }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_KASAN_HW_TAGS
>
> -static inline void kasan_poison(const void *addr, size_t size, u8 value)
> +static __always_inline void kasan_poison(const void *addr, size_t size, u8 value)
> {
> addr = kasan_reset_tag(addr);
>
> @@ -337,7 +337,7 @@ static inline void kasan_poison(const void *addr, size_t size, u8 value)
> hw_set_mem_tag_range((void *)addr, size, value);
> }
>
> -static inline void kasan_unpoison(const void *addr, size_t size)
> +static __always_inline void kasan_unpoison(const void *addr, size_t size)
> {
Not sure about these 2. They should be small, but it's hard to say what
is ideal on which architecture.
> u8 tag = get_tag(addr);
>
> @@ -354,7 +354,7 @@ static inline void kasan_unpoison(const void *addr, size_t size)
> hw_set_mem_tag_range((void *)addr, size, tag);
> }
>
> -static inline bool kasan_byte_accessible(const void *addr)
> +static __always_inline bool kasan_byte_accessible(const void *addr)
This function feels like a macro and if the compiler uninlined it, we
could argue it's a bug. But not sure if we need the __always_inline,
unless you've seen this uninlined.
> {
> u8 ptr_tag = get_tag(addr);
> u8 mem_tag = hw_get_mem_tag((void *)addr);
> --
> 2.30.0.365.g02bc693789-goog
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-03 15:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-01 19:43 [PATCH 00/12] kasan: optimizations and fixes for HW_TAGS Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 19:43 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 19:43 ` [PATCH 01/12] kasan, mm: don't save alloc stacks twice Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 19:43 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-02 16:06 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-02 16:06 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-02 18:01 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-02 18:01 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-02 18:40 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-02 18:40 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-01 19:43 ` [PATCH 02/12] kasan, mm: optimize kmalloc poisoning Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 19:43 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-02 16:25 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-02 16:25 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-02 17:15 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-02 17:15 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-02 17:39 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-02 17:39 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-01 19:43 ` [PATCH 03/12] kasan: optimize large " Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 19:43 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-02 16:57 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-02 16:57 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-01 19:43 ` [PATCH 04/12] kasan: clean up setting free info in kasan_slab_free Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 19:43 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-02 17:03 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-02 17:03 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-01 19:43 ` [PATCH 05/12] kasan: unify large kfree checks Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 19:43 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-03 12:13 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-03 12:13 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-01 19:43 ` [PATCH 06/12] kasan: rework krealloc tests Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 19:43 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-03 14:48 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-03 14:48 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-01 19:43 ` [PATCH 07/12] kasan, mm: remove krealloc side-effect Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 19:43 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-03 15:10 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-03 15:10 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-01 19:43 ` [PATCH 08/12] kasan, mm: optimize krealloc poisoning Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 19:43 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-03 14:34 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-03 14:34 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-01 19:43 ` [PATCH 09/12] kasan: ensure poisoning size alignment Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 19:43 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-03 15:31 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-03 15:31 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-01 19:43 ` [PATCH 10/12] arm64: kasan: simplify and inline MTE functions Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 19:43 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 22:44 ` Andrew Morton
2021-02-01 22:44 ` Andrew Morton
2021-02-04 12:39 ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-02-04 12:39 ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-02-02 15:42 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-02-02 15:42 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-02-02 18:04 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-02 18:04 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-04 12:37 ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-02-04 12:37 ` Vincenzo Frascino
2021-02-01 19:43 ` [PATCH 11/12] kasan: always inline HW_TAGS helper functions Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 19:43 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-03 15:51 ` Marco Elver [this message]
2021-02-03 15:51 ` Marco Elver
2021-02-01 19:43 ` [PATCH 12/12] arm64: kasan: export MTE symbols for KASAN tests Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-01 19:43 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-02 10:46 ` Will Deacon
2021-02-02 10:46 ` Will Deacon
2021-02-02 13:42 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-02 13:42 ` Andrey Konovalov
2021-02-02 15:43 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-02-02 15:43 ` Catalin Marinas
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=YBrGcY/DS1GnilYo@elver.google.com \
--to=elver@google.com \
--cc=Branislav.Rankov@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andreyknvl@google.com \
--cc=aryabinin@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=eugenis@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=kevin.brodsky@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=pcc@google.com \
--cc=vincenzo.frascino@arm.com \
--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.