From: Waiman Long <llong@redhat.com>
To: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@gmail.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@gmail.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>,
kasan-dev@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] locking/lockdep: Disable KASAN instrumentation of lockdep.c
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2025 11:57:28 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a6993bbd-ec8a-40e1-9ef2-74f920642188@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANpmjNNDArwBVcxAAAytw-KjJ0NazCPAUM0qBzjsu4bR6Kv1QA@mail.gmail.com>
On 2/12/25 6:30 AM, Marco Elver wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 at 06:57, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> wrote:
>> [Cc KASAN]
>>
>> A Reviewed-by or Acked-by from KASAN would be nice, thanks!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Boqun
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 09, 2025 at 11:26:12PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>>> Both KASAN and LOCKDEP are commonly enabled in building a debug kernel.
>>> Each of them can significantly slow down the speed of a debug kernel.
>>> Enabling KASAN instrumentation of the LOCKDEP code will further slow
>>> thing down.
>>>
>>> Since LOCKDEP is a high overhead debugging tool, it will never get
>>> enabled in a production kernel. The LOCKDEP code is also pretty mature
>>> and is unlikely to get major changes. There is also a possibility of
>>> recursion similar to KCSAN.
>>>
>>> To evaluate the performance impact of disabling KASAN instrumentation
>>> of lockdep.c, the time to do a parallel build of the Linux defconfig
>>> kernel was used as the benchmark. Two x86-64 systems (Skylake & Zen 2)
>>> and an arm64 system were used as test beds. Two sets of non-RT and RT
>>> kernels with similar configurations except mainly CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
>>> were used for evaulation.
>>>
>>> For the Skylake system:
>>>
>>> Kernel Run time Sys time
>>> ------ -------- --------
>>> Non-debug kernel (baseline) 0m47.642s 4m19.811s
>>> Debug kernel 2m11.108s (x2.8) 38m20.467s (x8.9)
>>> Debug kernel (patched) 1m49.602s (x2.3) 31m28.501s (x7.3)
>>> Debug kernel
>>> (patched + mitigations=off) 1m30.988s (x1.9) 26m41.993s (x6.2)
>>>
>>> RT kernel (baseline) 0m54.871s 7m15.340s
>>> RT debug kernel 6m07.151s (x6.7) 135m47.428s (x18.7)
>>> RT debug kernel (patched) 3m42.434s (x4.1) 74m51.636s (x10.3)
>>> RT debug kernel
>>> (patched + mitigations=off) 2m40.383s (x2.9) 57m54.369s (x8.0)
>>>
>>> For the Zen 2 system:
>>>
>>> Kernel Run time Sys time
>>> ------ -------- --------
>>> Non-debug kernel (baseline) 1m42.806s 39m48.714s
>>> Debug kernel 4m04.524s (x2.4) 125m35.904s (x3.2)
>>> Debug kernel (patched) 3m56.241s (x2.3) 127m22.378s (x3.2)
>>> Debug kernel
>>> (patched + mitigations=off) 2m38.157s (x1.5) 92m35.680s (x2.3)
>>>
>>> RT kernel (baseline) 1m51.500s 14m56.322s
>>> RT debug kernel 16m04.962s (x8.7) 244m36.463s (x16.4)
>>> RT debug kernel (patched) 9m09.073s (x4.9) 129m28.439s (x8.7)
>>> RT debug kernel
>>> (patched + mitigations=off) 3m31.662s (x1.9) 51m01.391s (x3.4)
>>>
>>> For the arm64 system:
>>>
>>> Kernel Run time Sys time
>>> ------ -------- --------
>>> Non-debug kernel (baseline) 1m56.844s 8m47.150s
>>> Debug kernel 3m54.774s (x2.0) 92m30.098s (x10.5)
>>> Debug kernel (patched) 3m32.429s (x1.8) 77m40.779s (x8.8)
>>>
>>> RT kernel (baseline) 4m01.641s 18m16.777s
>>> RT debug kernel 19m32.977s (x4.9) 304m23.965s (x16.7)
>>> RT debug kernel (patched) 16m28.354s (x4.1) 234m18.149s (x12.8)
>>>
>>> Turning the mitigations off doesn't seems to have any noticeable impact
>>> on the performance of the arm64 system. So the mitigation=off entries
>>> aren't included.
>>>
>>> For the x86 CPUs, cpu mitigations has a much bigger impact on
>>> performance, especially the RT debug kernel. The SRSO mitigation in
>>> Zen 2 has an especially big impact on the debug kernel. It is also the
>>> majority of the slowdown with mitigations on. It is because the patched
>>> ret instruction slows down function returns. A lot of helper functions
>>> that are normally compiled out or inlined may become real function
>>> calls in the debug kernel. The KASAN instrumentation inserts a lot
>>> of __asan_loadX*() and __kasan_check_read() function calls to memory
>>> access portion of the code. The lockdep's __lock_acquire() function,
>>> for instance, has 66 __asan_loadX*() and 6 __kasan_check_read() calls
>>> added with KASAN instrumentation. Of course, the actual numbers may vary
>>> depending on the compiler used and the exact version of the lockdep code.
> For completeness-sake, we'd also have to compare with
> CONFIG_KASAN_INLINE=y, which gets rid of the __asan_ calls (not the
> explicit __kasan_ checks). But I leave it up to you - I'm aware it
> results in slow-downs, too. ;-)
I just realize that my config file for non-RT debug kernel does have
CONFIG_KASAN_INLINE=y set, though the RT debug kernel does not have
this. For the non-RT debug kernel, the _asan_report_load* functions are
still being called because lockdep.c is very big (> 6k lines of code).
So "call_threshold := 10000" in scripts/Makefile.kasan is probably not
enough for lockdep.c.
>
>>> With the newly added rtmutex and lockdep lock events, the relevant
>>> event counts for the test runs with the Skylake system were:
>>>
>>> Event type Debug kernel RT debug kernel
>>> ---------- ------------ ---------------
>>> lockdep_acquire 1,968,663,277 5,425,313,953
>>> rtlock_slowlock - 401,701,156
>>> rtmutex_slowlock - 139,672
>>>
>>> The __lock_acquire() calls in the RT debug kernel are x2.8 times of the
>>> non-RT debug kernel with the same workload. Since the __lock_acquire()
>>> function is a big hitter in term of performance slowdown, this makes
>>> the RT debug kernel much slower than the non-RT one. The average lock
>>> nesting depth is likely to be higher in the RT debug kernel too leading
>>> to longer execution time in the __lock_acquire() function.
>>>
>>> As the small advantage of enabling KASAN instrumentation to catch
>>> potential memory access error in the lockdep debugging tool is probably
>>> not worth the drawback of further slowing down a debug kernel, disable
>>> KASAN instrumentation in the lockdep code to allow the debug kernels
>>> to regain some performance back, especially for the RT debug kernels.
> It's not about catching a bug in the lockdep code, but rather guard
> against bugs in code that allocated the storage for some
> synchronization object. Since lockdep state is embedded in each
> synchronization object, lockdep checking code may be passed a
> reference to garbage data, e.g. on use-after-free (or even
> out-of-bounds if there's an array of sync objects). In that case, all
> bets are off and lockdep may produce random false reports. Sure the
> system is already in a bad state at that point, but it's going to make
> debugging much harder.
>
> Our approach has always been to ensure that as soon as there's an
> error state detected it's reported as soon as we can, before it
> results in random failure as execution continues (e.g. bad lock
> reports).
>
> To guard against that, I would propose adding carefully placed
> kasan_check_byte() in lockdep code.
Will take a look at that.
Cheers,
Longman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-12 16:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-10 4:26 [PATCH v3 0/3] locking/lockdep: Disable KASAN instrumentation of lockdep.c Waiman Long
2025-02-10 4:26 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] locking/lock_events: Add locking events for rtmutex slow paths Waiman Long
2025-02-10 4:26 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] locking/lock_events: Add locking events for lockdep Waiman Long
2025-02-10 4:26 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] locking/lockdep: Disable KASAN instrumentation of lockdep.c Waiman Long
2025-02-12 5:57 ` Boqun Feng
2025-02-12 11:30 ` Marco Elver
2025-02-12 16:57 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2025-02-13 20:06 ` Waiman Long
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=a6993bbd-ec8a-40e1-9ef2-74f920642188@redhat.com \
--to=llong@redhat.com \
--cc=andreyknvl@gmail.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ryabinin.a.a@gmail.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.