From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
David Safford <safford@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@intel.com>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@us.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 06/11] ima: replace iint spinlock with rwlock/read_lock
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 14:10:43 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1330629048-5933-7-git-send-email-zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1330629048-5933-1-git-send-email-zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
For performance, replace the iint spinlock with rwlock/read_lock.
Eric Paris questioned this change, from spinlocks to rwlocks, saying
"rwlocks have been shown to actually be slower on multi processor
systems in a number of cases due to the cache line bouncing required."
Based on performance measurements compiling the kernel on a cold
boot with multiple jobs with/without this patch, Dmitry Kasatkin
and I found that rwlocks performed better than spinlocks, but very
insignificantly. For example with total compilation time around 6
minutes, with rwlocks time was 1 - 3 seconds shorter... but always
like that.
Changelog v2:
- new patch taken from the 'allocating iint improvements' patch
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@us.ibm.com>
---
security/integrity/iint.c | 16 +++++++---------
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/security/integrity/iint.c b/security/integrity/iint.c
index c91a436..d82a5a1 100644
--- a/security/integrity/iint.c
+++ b/security/integrity/iint.c
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
#include "integrity.h"
static struct rb_root integrity_iint_tree = RB_ROOT;
-static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(integrity_iint_lock);
+static DEFINE_RWLOCK(integrity_iint_lock);
static struct kmem_cache *iint_cache __read_mostly;
int iint_initialized;
@@ -35,8 +35,6 @@ static struct integrity_iint_cache *__integrity_iint_find(struct inode *inode)
struct integrity_iint_cache *iint;
struct rb_node *n = integrity_iint_tree.rb_node;
- assert_spin_locked(&integrity_iint_lock);
-
while (n) {
iint = rb_entry(n, struct integrity_iint_cache, rb_node);
@@ -63,9 +61,9 @@ struct integrity_iint_cache *integrity_iint_find(struct inode *inode)
if (!IS_IMA(inode))
return NULL;
- spin_lock(&integrity_iint_lock);
+ read_lock(&integrity_iint_lock);
iint = __integrity_iint_find(inode);
- spin_unlock(&integrity_iint_lock);
+ read_unlock(&integrity_iint_lock);
return iint;
}
@@ -100,7 +98,7 @@ struct integrity_iint_cache *integrity_inode_get(struct inode *inode)
if (!iint)
return NULL;
- spin_lock(&integrity_iint_lock);
+ write_lock(&integrity_iint_lock);
p = &integrity_iint_tree.rb_node;
while (*p) {
@@ -119,7 +117,7 @@ struct integrity_iint_cache *integrity_inode_get(struct inode *inode)
rb_link_node(node, parent, p);
rb_insert_color(node, &integrity_iint_tree);
- spin_unlock(&integrity_iint_lock);
+ write_unlock(&integrity_iint_lock);
return iint;
}
@@ -136,10 +134,10 @@ void integrity_inode_free(struct inode *inode)
if (!IS_IMA(inode))
return;
- spin_lock(&integrity_iint_lock);
+ write_lock(&integrity_iint_lock);
iint = __integrity_iint_find(inode);
rb_erase(&iint->rb_node, &integrity_iint_tree);
- spin_unlock(&integrity_iint_lock);
+ write_unlock(&integrity_iint_lock);
iint_free(iint);
}
--
1.7.6.5
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-01 19:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-01 19:10 [PATCH v2 00/11] ima: appraisal extension Mimi Zohar
2012-03-01 19:10 ` [PATCH v2 01/11] vfs: extend vfs_removexattr locking Mimi Zohar
2012-03-01 19:10 ` [PATCH v2 02/11] vfs: move ima_file_free before releasing the file Mimi Zohar
2012-03-01 19:10 ` [PATCH v2 03/11] ima: integrity appraisal extension Mimi Zohar
2012-03-01 19:10 ` [PATCH v2 04/11] ima: add appraise action keywords and default rules Mimi Zohar
2012-03-01 19:10 ` [PATCH v2 05/11] ima: allocating iint improvements Mimi Zohar
2012-03-01 19:10 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2012-03-01 19:10 ` [PATCH v2 07/11] ima: add inode_post_setattr call Mimi Zohar
2012-03-01 19:10 ` [PATCH v2 08/11] ima: add ima_inode_setxattr/removexattr function and calls Mimi Zohar
2012-03-01 19:10 ` [PATCH v2 09/11] ima: delay calling __fput() Mimi Zohar
2012-03-01 19:10 ` [PATCH v2 10/11] ima: add support for different security.ima data types Mimi Zohar
2012-03-01 19:10 ` [PATCH v2 11/11] ima: digital signature verification support Mimi Zohar
2012-03-07 10:08 ` [PATCH v2 00/11] ima: appraisal extension James Morris
2012-03-07 20:44 ` George Wilson
2012-03-13 9:42 ` Ryan Ware
2012-03-13 10:03 ` Kasatkin, Dmitry
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=1330629048-5933-7-git-send-email-zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=dmitry.kasatkin@intel.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=safford@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=zohar@us.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).