linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] ftrace: to kill a daemon

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, 8 Aug 2008 14:13:23 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@...g.org>,
	Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] ftrace: to kill a daemon


On Fri, 8 Aug 2008, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Steven Rostedt (rostedt@...dmis.org) wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, 8 Aug 2008, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > * Steven Rostedt (rostedt@...dmis.org) wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > I originally used jumps instead of nops, but unfortunately, they actually 
> > > > hurt performance more than adding nops. Ingo told me it was probably due
> > > > to using up the jump predictions of the CPU.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Hrm, are you sure you use a single 5-bytes nop instruction then, or do
> > > you use a mix of various nop sizes (add_nops) on some architectures ?
> > 
> > I use (for x86) what is in include/asm-x86/nops.h depending on what the
> > cpuid gives us.
> > 
> 
> That's bad :
> 
> #define GENERIC_NOP5 GENERIC_NOP1 GENERIC_NOP4
> 
> #define K8_NOP5 K8_NOP3 K8_NOP2
> 
> #define K7_NOP5 K7_NOP4 ASM_NOP1
> 
> So, when you try, later, to replace these instructions with a single
> 5-bytes instruction, a preempted thread could iret in the middle of your
> 5-bytes insn and cause an illegal instruction ?

That's why I use kstop_machine.

> 
> 
> > > 
> > > You can consume the branch prediction buffers for conditional branches,
> > > but I doubt static jumps have this impact ? I don't see what "jump
> > > predictions" you are referring to here exactly.
> > 
> > I don't know the details, but we definitely saw a drop in preformance 
> > between using nops and static jumps.
> > 
> 
> Generated by replacing all the call by 5-bytes jumps e9 00 00 00 00
> instead of the 5-bytes add_nops ? On which architectures ?
> 

I ran this on my Dell (intel Xeon), which IIRC did show the performance 
degration. I unfortunately don't have the time to redo those tests, but 
you are welcome to.

Just look at arch/x86/kernel/ftrace.c and replace the nop with the jump.
In fact, the comments in that file still say it is a jmp. Remember, my 
first go was to use the jmp.

-- Steve

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/