linux-kernel - Re: Severe performance regression w/ 4.4+ on Android due to cgroup locking changes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 14 Jul 2016 20:09:52 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dmitry Shmidt <dimitrysh@...gle.com>,
	Rom Lemarchand <romlem@...gle.com>,
	Colin Cross <ccross@...gle.com>, Todd Kjos <tkjos@...gle.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Severe performance regression w/ 4.4+ on Android due to cgroup
	locking changes

On 07/14, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> The below is a compile tested only first draft so far. I'll go give it
> some runtime next.

So I will wait for the new version, but at first glance this matches the
code I already reviewed in the past (at least, tried hard to review ;)
and it looks correct.

Just a couple of almost cosmetic nits, feel free to ignore.

> --- a/include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h
> +++ b/include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h
> @@ -10,29 +10,107 @@
>  
>  struct percpu_rw_semaphore {
>  	struct rcu_sync		rss;
> -	unsigned int __percpu	*fast_read_ctr;
> +	unsigned int __percpu	*refcount;
>  	struct rw_semaphore	rw_sem;
> -	atomic_t		slow_read_ctr;
> -	wait_queue_head_t	write_waitq;
> +	wait_queue_head_t	writer;
> +	int			state;
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I think that this "int state" and "enum { readers_slow, readers_block }"
just add a bit of complication/confusion.

All we need is the simple "bool readers_block" in percpu_rw_semaphore,
no?

> +void percpu_down_write(struct percpu_rw_semaphore *sem)
>  {
> +	down_write(&sem->rw_sem);
> +
> +	/* Notify readers to take the slow path. */
> +	rcu_sync_enter(&sem->rss);

I'd suggest to call rcu_sync_enter() before down_write(). This can help
when we wait for another writer which holds this lock.

Oleg.