linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] PCID and improved laziness

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Sun, 18 Jun 2017 21:43:54 -0700
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To:     "Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin)" <alexander.levin@...izon.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] PCID and improved laziness

On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin)
<alexander.levin@...izon.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 09:56:18PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>There are three performance benefits here:
>>
>>1. TLB flushing is slow.  (I.e. the flush itself takes a while.)
>>   This avoids many of them when switching tasks by using PCID.  In
>>   a stupid little benchmark I did, it saves about 100ns on my laptop
>>   per context switch.  I'll try to improve that benchmark.
>>
>>2. Mms that have been used recently on a given CPU might get to keep
>>   their TLB entries alive across process switches with this patch
>>   set.  TLB fills are pretty fast on modern CPUs, but they're even
>>   faster when they don't happen.
>>
>>3. Lazy TLB is way better.  We used to do two stupid things when we
>>   ran kernel threads: we'd send IPIs to flush user contexts on their
>>   CPUs and then we'd write to CR3 for no particular reason as an excuse
>>   to stop further IPIs.  With this patch, we do neither.
>>
>>This will, in general, perform suboptimally if paravirt TLB flushing
>>is in use (currently just Xen, I think, but Hyper-V is in the works).
>>The code is structured so we could fix it in one of two ways: we
>>could take a spinlock when touching the percpu state so we can update
>>it remotely after a paravirt flush, or we could be more careful about
>>our exactly how we access the state and use cmpxchg16b to do atomic
>>remote updates.  (On SMP systems without cmpxchg16b, we'd just skip
>>the optimization entirely.)
>
> Hey Andy,
>
> I've started seeing the following in -next:
>
> ------------[ cut here ]------------
> kernel BUG at arch/x86/mm/tlb.c:47!

...

> Call Trace:
>  flush_tlb_func_local arch/x86/mm/tlb.c:239 [inline]
>  flush_tlb_mm_range+0x26d/0x370 arch/x86/mm/tlb.c:317
>  flush_tlb_page arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h:253 [inline]

I think I see what's going on, and it should be fixed in the PCID
series.  I'll split out the fix.