From: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
To: Samuel Wu <wusamuel@google.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: memxor@gmail.com, Samuel Wu <wusamuel@google.com>,
kernel-team@android.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, driver-core@lists.linux.dev,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Support BPF traversal of wakeup sources
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2026 12:20:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m2v7eig4ue.fsf@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260326112521.2827500-1-wusamuel@google.com>
Samuel Wu <wusamuel@google.com> writes:
> This patchset adds requisite kfuncs for BPF programs to safely traverse
> wakeup_sources, and puts a config flag around the sysfs interface.
>
> Currently, a traversal of wakeup sources require going through
> /sys/class/wakeup/* or /d/wakeup_sources/*. The repeated syscalls to query
> sysfs is inefficient, as there can be hundreds of wakeup_sources, with each
> wakeup source also having multiple attributes. debugfs is unstable and
> insecure.
>
> Adding kfuncs to lock/unlock wakeup sources allows BPF program to safely
> traverse the wakeup sources list. The head address of wakeup_sources can
> safely be resolved through BPF helper functions or variable attributes.
>
> On a quiescent Pixel 6 traversing 150 wakeup_sources, I am seeing ~34x
> speedup (sampled 75 times in table below). For a device under load, the
> speedup is greater.
> +-------+----+----------+----------+
> | | n | AVG (ms) | STD (ms) |
> +-------+----+----------+----------+
> | sysfs | 75 | 44.9 | 12.6 |
> +-------+----+----------+----------+
> | BPF | 75 | 1.3 | 0.7 |
> +-------+----+----------+----------+
>
> The initial attempts for BPF traversal of wakeup_sources was with BPF
> iterators [1]. However, BPF already allows for traversing of a simple list
> with bpf_for(), and this current patchset has the added benefit of being
> ~2-3x more performant than BPF iterators.
I left some inline comments on patch 1, but the high level concern is
that encoding the SRCU index into a fake pointer to get KF_ACQUIRE/
KF_RELEASE tracking is working against the verifier rather than with it.
Nothing actually prevents a BPF program from walking the list without
the lock, and the whole pointer encoding trick goes away if this is done
as an open-coded iterator instead.
Thanks,
Puranjay
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-26 12:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-26 11:25 [PATCH v2 0/2] Support BPF traversal of wakeup sources Samuel Wu
2026-03-26 11:25 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] PM: wakeup: Add kfuncs to traverse over wakeup_sources Samuel Wu
2026-03-26 11:59 ` Puranjay Mohan
2026-03-26 11:25 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add tests for wakeup_sources kfuncs Samuel Wu
2026-03-26 12:20 ` Puranjay Mohan [this message]
2026-03-26 14:53 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Support BPF traversal of wakeup sources Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-03-26 15:01 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-03-26 16:25 ` Samuel Wu
2026-03-26 16:30 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
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=m2v7eig4ue.fsf@kernel.org \
--to=puranjay@kernel.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=driver-core@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=pavel@kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=wusamuel@google.com \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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