public inbox for fsverity@lists.linux.dev
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, fsverity@lists.linux.dev,
	dm-devel@lists.linux.dev, x86@kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
	Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 15/15] dm-verity: improve performance by using multibuffer hashing
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 08:38:29 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240612153829.GC1170@sol.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Zmlq5Y5MgEAVF42C@gondor.apana.org.au>

On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 05:31:17PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 08:48:22PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> >
> > +		if (++io->num_pending == v->mb_max_msgs) {
> > +			r = verity_verify_pending_blocks(v, io, bio);
> > +			if (unlikely(r))
> > +				goto error;
> >  		}
> 
> What is the overhead if you just let it accumulate as large a
> request as possible? We should let the underlying algorithm decide
> how to divide this up in the most optimal fashion.
> 

The queue adds 144*num_messages bytes to each bio.  It's desirable to keep this
memory overhead down.  So it makes sense to limit the queue length to the
multibuffer hashing interleaving factor.  Yes we could build something where you
could get a marginal performance benefit from amounts higher than that by saving
indirect calls, but I think it wouldn't be worth bloating the per-IO memory.

Another thing to keep in mind is that with how the dm-verity code is currently
structured, for each data block it gets the wanted hash from the Merkle tree
(which it prefetched earlier) before hashing the data block.  So I also worry
that if we wait too long before starting to hash the data blocks, dm-verity will
spend more time unnecessarily blocked on waiting for Merkle tree I/O.

- Eric

  reply	other threads:[~2024-06-12 15:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-06-11  3:48 [PATCH v5 00/15] Optimize dm-verity and fsverity using multibuffer hashing Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 01/15] crypto: shash - add support for finup_mb Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 02/15] crypto: testmgr - generate power-of-2 lengths more often Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 03/15] crypto: testmgr - add tests for finup_mb Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 04/15] crypto: x86/sha256-ni - add support " Eric Biggers
2024-06-12  9:42   ` Herbert Xu
2024-06-12 15:27     ` Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 05/15] crypto: arm64/sha256-ce " Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 06/15] fsverity: improve performance by using multibuffer hashing Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 07/15] dm-verity: move hash algorithm setup into its own function Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 08/15] dm-verity: move data hash mismatch handling " Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 09/15] dm-verity: make real_digest and want_digest fixed-length Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 10/15] dm-verity: provide dma_alignment limit in io_hints Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 11/15] dm-verity: always "map" the data blocks Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 12/15] dm-verity: make verity_hash() take dm_verity_io instead of ahash_request Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 13/15] dm-verity: hash blocks with shash import+finup when possible Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 14/15] dm-verity: reduce scope of real and wanted digests Eric Biggers
2024-06-11  3:48 ` [PATCH v5 15/15] dm-verity: improve performance by using multibuffer hashing Eric Biggers
2024-06-12  9:31   ` Herbert Xu
2024-06-12 15:38     ` Eric Biggers [this message]
2024-06-12 19:14       ` Eric Biggers
2024-06-11 15:39 ` [PATCH v5 00/15] Optimize dm-verity and fsverity " Ard Biesheuvel
2024-06-11 16:27 ` Sami Tolvanen
2024-07-10 10:54 ` Mikulas Patocka
2024-07-10 18:14   ` Eric Biggers
2024-07-11  6:10     ` Ard Biesheuvel

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=20240612153829.GC1170@sol.localdomain \
    --to=ebiggers@kernel.org \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=dm-devel@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=fsverity@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
    --cc=x86@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