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:   Fri, 30 Mar 2018 10:29:21 +0900
From:   Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
To:     Ganesh Mahendran <opensource.ganesh@...il.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@...gle.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Martijn Coenen <maco@...roid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] ANDROID: binder: change down_write to down_read

Hi Ganesh,

On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 09:21:55AM +0800, Ganesh Mahendran wrote:
> 2018-03-29 14:54 GMT+08:00 Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>:
> > binder_update_page_range needs down_write of mmap_sem because
> > vm_insert_page need to change vma->vm_flags to VM_MIXEDMAP unless
> > it is set. However, when I profile binder working, it seems
> > every binder buffers should be mapped in advance by binder_mmap.
> > It means we could set VM_MIXEDMAP in binder_mmap time which is
> > already hold a mmap_sem as down_write so binder_update_page_range
> > doesn't need to hold a mmap_sem as down_write.
> >
> > Android suffers from mmap_sem contention so let's reduce mmap_sem
> > down_write.
> 
> Hi, Minchan:
> 
> It seems there is performance regression of this patch.

You mean "This patch aims for solving performance regression" not "This patch
makes performance regression"?

> 
> Do you have some test result of android app launch time or binderThroughput?

Unfortunately, I don't have any number. The goal is to reduce the number of
call mmap_sem as write-side lock because it makes priority inversion of threads
easily and that's one of clear part I spot that we don't need write-side lock.

Thanks.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ