From: Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com,
andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, martin.lau@kernel.org,
memxor@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev,
song@kernel.org, ameryhung@gmail.com, kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/4] Replace BPF memory allocator with kmalloc_nolock() in local storage
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 12:13:22 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251114201329.3275875-1-ameryhung@gmail.com> (raw)
Hi,
This patchset tries to simplify bpf_local_storage.c by adopting
kmalloc_nolock(). This removes memory preallocation and reduces the
dependency of smap in bpf_selem_free() and bpf_local_storage_free().
The later will simplify a future refactor that replaces
local_storage->lock and b->lock [1].
RFC v1 tried to switch to kmalloc_nolock() unconditionally. However,
as there is substantial performance loss in socket local storage due to
1) defer_free() in kfree_nolock() and 2) no kfree_rcu() batching,
replacing kzalloc() is postponed until necessary improvements in mm
land.
Benchmark
./bench -p 1 local-storage-create --storage-type <socket,task> \
--batch-size <16,32,64>
The benchmark is a microbenchmark stress-testing how fast local storage
can be created. For task local storage, switching from BPF memory
allocator to kmalloc_nolock() yields a small amount of improvement. For
socket local storage, it remains roughly the same as nothing has changed.
Socket local storage
memory alloc batch creation speed creation speed diff
--------------- ---- ------------------ ----
kzalloc 16 144.149 ± 0.642k/s 3.10 kmallocs/create
(before) 32 144.379 ± 1.070k/s 3.08 kmallocs/create
64 144.491 ± 0.818k/s 3.13 kmallocs/create
kzalloc 16 146.180 ± 1.403k/s 3.10 kmallocs/create +1.4%
(not changed) 32 146.245 ± 1.272k/s 3.10 kmallocs/create +1.3%
64 145.012 ± 1.545k/s 3.10 kmallocs/create +0.4%
Task local storage
memory alloc batch creation speed creation speed diff
--------------- ---- ------------------ ----
BPF memory 16 24.668 ± 0.121k/s 2.54 kmallocs/create
allocator 32 22.899 ± 0.097k/s 2.67 kmallocs/create
(before) 64 22.559 ± 0.076k/s 2.56 kmallocs/create
kmalloc_nolock 16 25.796 ± 0.059k/s 2.52 kmallocs/create +4.6%
(after) 32 23.412 ± 0.069k/s 2.50 kmallocs/create +2.2%
64 23.717 ± 0.108k/s 2.60 kmallocs/create +5.1%
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20251002225356.1505480-1-ameryhung@gmail.com/
v1 -> v2
- Only replace BPF memory allocator with kmalloc_nolock()
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20251112175939.2365295-1-ameryhung@gmail.com/
---
Amery Hung (4):
bpf: Always charge/uncharge memory when allocating/unlinking storage
elements
bpf: Remove smap argument from bpf_selem_free()
bpf: Save memory alloction info in bpf_local_storage
bpf: Replace bpf memory allocator with kmalloc_nolock() in local
storage
include/linux/bpf_local_storage.h | 10 +-
kernel/bpf/bpf_local_storage.c | 235 +++++++++---------------------
net/core/bpf_sk_storage.c | 4 +-
3 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 175 deletions(-)
--
2.47.3
next reply other threads:[~2025-11-14 20:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-14 20:13 Amery Hung [this message]
2025-11-14 20:13 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/4] bpf: Always charge/uncharge memory when allocating/unlinking storage elements Amery Hung
2025-11-17 18:25 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2025-11-14 20:13 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 2/4] bpf: Remove smap argument from bpf_selem_free() Amery Hung
2025-11-17 18:32 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2025-11-14 20:13 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 3/4] bpf: Save memory alloction info in bpf_local_storage Amery Hung
2025-11-17 18:36 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2025-11-14 20:13 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 4/4] bpf: Replace bpf memory allocator with kmalloc_nolock() in local storage Amery Hung
2025-11-15 2:01 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-11-17 19:21 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2025-11-17 20:37 ` Amery Hung
2025-11-17 23:36 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-11-17 23:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-18 0:24 ` Amery Hung
2025-11-18 0:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-11-19 0:30 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/4] Replace BPF " patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20251114201329.3275875-1-ameryhung@gmail.com \
--to=ameryhung@gmail.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).