From: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>,
Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
kernel-team@meta.com, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/2] bpf: Optimize recursion detection on arm64
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2025 15:35:55 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251217233608.2374187-1-puranjay@kernel.org> (raw)
V1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251217162830.2597286-1-puranjay@kernel.org/
Changes in V1->V2:
- Patch 2:
- Put preempt_enable()/disable() around RMW accesses to mitigate
race conditions. Because on CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU and sleepable
bpf programs, preemption can cause no prog to execute.
BPF programs detect recursion using a per-CPU 'active' flag in struct
bpf_prog. The trampoline currently sets/clears this flag with atomic
operations.
On some arm64 platforms (e.g., Neoverse V2 with LSE), per-CPU atomic
operations are relatively slow. Unlike x86_64 - where per-CPU updates
can avoid cross-core atomicity, arm64 LSE atomics are always atomic
across all cores, which is unnecessary overhead for strictly per-CPU
state.
This patch removes atomics from the recursion detection path on arm64.
It was discovered in [1] that per-CPU atomics that don't return a value
were extremely slow on some arm64 platforms, Catalin added a fix in
commit 535fdfc5a228 ("arm64: Use load LSE atomics for the non-return
per-CPU atomic operations") to solve this issue, but it seems to have
caused a regression on the fentry benchmark.
Using the fentry benchmark from the bpf selftests shows the following:
./tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bench trig-fentry
+---------------------------------------------+------------------------+
| Configuration | Total Operations (M/s) |
+---------------------------------------------+------------------------+
| bpf-next/master with Catalin’s fix reverted | 51.862 |
|---------------------------------------------|------------------------|
| bpf-next/master | 43.067 |
| bpf-next/master with this change | 53.856 |
+---------------------------------------------+------------------------+
All benchmarks were run on a KVM based vm with Neoverse-V2 and 8 cpus.
This patch yields a 25% improvement in this benchmark compared to
bpf-next. Notably, reverting Catalin's fix also results in a performance
gain for this benchmark, which is interesting but expected.
For completeness, this benchmark was also run with the change enabled on
x86-64, which resulted in a 30% regression in the fentry benchmark. So,
it is only enabled on arm64.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/e7d539ed-ced0-4b96-8ecd-048a5b803b85@paulmck-laptop/
Puranjay Mohan (2):
bpf: move recursion detection logic to helpers
bpf: arm64: Optimize recursion detection by not using atomics
include/linux/bpf.h | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
kernel/bpf/core.c | 3 ++-
kernel/bpf/trampoline.c | 8 ++++----
kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 4 ++--
4 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
base-commit: ec439c38013550420aecc15988ae6acb670838c1
--
2.47.3
next reply other threads:[~2025-12-17 23:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-17 23:35 Puranjay Mohan [this message]
2025-12-17 23:35 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: move recursion detection logic to helpers Puranjay Mohan
2025-12-18 17:44 ` Yonghong Song
2025-12-17 23:35 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] bpf: arm64: Optimize recursion detection by not using atomics Puranjay Mohan
2025-12-18 17:55 ` Yonghong Song
2025-12-19 16:40 ` Puranjay Mohan
2025-12-19 18:23 ` Puranjay Mohan
2025-12-18 2:52 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/2] bpf: Optimize recursion detection on arm64 Puranjay Mohan
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=20251217233608.2374187-1-puranjay@kernel.org \
--to=puranjay@kernel.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=puranjay12@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox