From: Waiman Long <llong@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Waiman Long <llong@redhat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Disable KASAN instrumentation of lockdep.c
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2025 09:11:25 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c263295e-0345-40a2-932e-b83c7728941c@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250203112445.GE505@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 2/3/25 6:24 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 04:47:06PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 1/31/25 11:50 AM, Waiman Long wrote:
>>> Both KASAN and LOCKDEP are commonly enabled in building a debug kernel.
>>> Each of them can significantly slow down the speed of a debug kernel.
>>> Enabling KASAN instrumentation of the LOCKDEP code will further slow
>>> thing down.
>>>
>>> Since LOCKDEP is a high overhead debugging tool, it will never get
>>> enabled in a production kernel. The LOCKDEP code is also pretty mature
>>> and is unlikely to get major changes. There is also a possibility of
>>> recursion similar to KCSAN. As the small advantage of enabling KASAN
>>> instrumentation to catch potential memory access error is probably
>>> not worth the drawback of further slowing down a debug kernel, disable
>>> KASAN instrumentation to enable a debug kernel to gain a little bit of
>>> speed back.
>>>
>>> With a debug kernel with both LOCKDEP and KASAN enabled running on a
>>> 2-socket 144-thread system, the time to do a "make -j144" kernel build
>>> was 18m40.641s. After applying this patch, the parallel kernel build
>>> time was reduced to 17m35.136s. This is a reduction of about 66s (5.8%).
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>> kernel/locking/Makefile | 1 +
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kernel/locking/Makefile b/kernel/locking/Makefile
>>> index 0db4093d17b8..8a588b0227b1 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/locking/Makefile
>>> +++ b/kernel/locking/Makefile
>>> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ KCOV_INSTRUMENT := n
>>> obj-y += mutex.o semaphore.o rwsem.o percpu-rwsem.o
>>> # Avoid recursion lockdep -> sanitizer -> ... -> lockdep.
>>> +KASAN_SANITIZE_lockdep.o := n
>>> KCSAN_SANITIZE_lockdep.o := n
>>> ifdef CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER
>> The rationale behind this patch is due to the fact that a similar configured
>> PREEMPT_RT debug kernel is found to be about 3 times slower than the non-RT
>> debug kernel. For the test same system, the parallel build runtime is
>> 59m56.722s. After applying this patch, it is reduced to 38m3.348s. Its more
>> than 1/3 reduction is more than I would have expected. So the lockdep code
>> is much more heavily used in a PREEMPT_RT debug kernel.
> Perhaps put that in the changelog instead?
>
> Its not like RT is this secret out of tree project :-)
>
> Also, any quick clues as to what causes the extra lockdep overhead?
> Initially I thought perhaps local-lock, but that should also cause
> lockdep on !RT builds.
Yes, I am planning to update the patch with more RT debug kernel
performance data.
As to why, my guess is that the average nesting depth will be higher
because spin_lock_irq* no longer disable IRQ and there is an extra wait
lock underneath the rt-mutex. Also the increase in the number of
sleep-wake cycles because of the sleeping lock nature of rt-spinlock may
be a contributing factor.
Cheers,
Longman
Cheers,
Longman
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-03 14:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-31 16:50 [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Disable KASAN instrumentation of lockdep.c Waiman Long
2025-01-31 21:47 ` Waiman Long
2025-02-03 11:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-03 14:11 ` Waiman Long [this message]
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=c263295e-0345-40a2-932e-b83c7728941c@redhat.com \
--to=llong@redhat.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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