linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] getname_maybe_null() - the third variant of pathname copy-in
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 18:05:03 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241021170503.GA1350452@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241021-weinreben-loslegen-564010b902a7@brauner>

On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 02:47:59PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 08:38:22PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 05:51:58PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > 
> > > Extra cycles where?  If anything, I'd expect a too-small-to-measure
> > > speedup due to dereference shifted from path_init() to __set_nameidata().
> > > Below is literally all it takes to make filename_lookup() treat NULL
> > > as empty-string name.
> > > 
> > > NOTE: I'm not talking about forcing the pure by-descriptor case through
> > > the dfd+pathname codepath; not without serious profiling.  But treating
> > > AT_FDCWD + NULL by the delta below and passing NULL struct filename to
> > > filename_lookup()?  Where do you expect to have the lost cycles on that?
> > 
> > [snip]
> > 
> > BTW, could you give me a reference to the mail with those objections?
> > I don't see anything in my mailbox, but...
> 
> I had to search for quite a bit myself:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/CAHk-=wifPKRG2w4mw+YchNtAuk4mMJBde7bG-Z7wt0+ZeQMJ_A@mail.gmail.com

Re get_user() - there's one architecture where this fetch is a clear loss.
Take a look at what um is doing; it's a full page table walk, then
(single-byte) memcpy().  With no caching of page table walk results,
so strncpy_from_user() in case the sucker is _not_ empty will have to
start from scratch (and it's _not_ generic strncpy_from_user() there,
for the same reasons).

BTW, I wonder if we could speed the things up on um by caching the last
page table walk result - and treating that as a TLB.  Might make
back-to-back get_user()/put_user() seriously cheaper there - unsafe_get_user()
could grow a fastpath, possibly making generic strncpy_from_user() cheap
enough to be used.  If that is feasible, the only non-generic variant
would remain on mips, and that's a lot less convincing case than um.
Possibly strnlen_user(), as well - that one has a variant on xtensa,
but that's also not an obvious win compared to generic...

That's a separate story, anyway.

  reply	other threads:[~2024-10-21 17:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-10-09  4:03 [RFC][PATCH] getname_maybe_null() - the third variant of pathname copy-in Al Viro
2024-10-15 14:05 ` Christian Brauner
2024-10-16  5:09   ` Al Viro
2024-10-16  8:32     ` Christian Brauner
2024-10-16 14:00       ` Al Viro
2024-10-16 14:49         ` Christian Brauner
2024-10-17 23:54           ` Al Viro
2024-10-18 11:06             ` Christian Brauner
2024-10-18 16:51               ` Al Viro
2024-10-18 19:38                 ` Al Viro
2024-10-19  5:03                   ` Al Viro
2024-10-19 16:15                     ` Linus Torvalds
2024-10-19 17:11                       ` Al Viro
2024-10-19 17:27                         ` Linus Torvalds
2024-10-21 12:38                         ` Christian Brauner
2024-10-21 12:39                     ` Christian Brauner
2024-10-21 17:09                       ` Al Viro
2024-10-21 22:43                         ` Al Viro
2024-10-22  8:49                           ` Christian Brauner
2024-10-30  6:37                             ` Al Viro
2024-10-21 12:47                   ` Christian Brauner
2024-10-21 17:05                     ` Al Viro [this message]
2024-10-21 12:36                 ` Christian Brauner

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=20241021170503.GA1350452@ZenIV \
    --to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).