| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20081002214359.GA24693@Krystal>
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 17:43:59 -0400
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@...stal.dyndns.org>
To: ltt-dev@...ts.casi.polymtl.ca, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mbligh@...gle.com, Jiaying Zhang <jiayingz@...gle.com>
Subject: [TEST] LTTng relay-alloc cache tests
With these tests, I come to the surprising conclusion that it is faster
to keep the buffer pages as write-back than to set them to
write-combined or uncached. I would have thought that keeping the
cachelines free for kernel or userspace cache lines would have improved
performance, but for some reason it doesn't.
Doing these tests under a webserver-like workload would however be
interesting. Feel free to play with this. :-)
Mathieu
LTTng trace buffer memory cache behavior comparison
Tracing in flight recorder mode with default size buffers
LTTng 0.31, kernel 2.6.27-rc8
Dual quad-core x86_64 with 16GB ram
** tbench (MB/s) **
tracing disabled : 1862.24
tracing flight recorder default buffer size :
cache WB : 942.72
cache WC (write-combined) : 755.94
uncached : 780.03
** kernel compilation **
make clean
sync
sync
echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
time make -j10
[timing 1, cache cold]
make clean
make -j10
[timing 2, cache hot]
Tracing disabled :
[timing 1, cache cold]
real 1m24.729s
user 7m22.952s
sys 0m48.943s
[timing 2, cache hot]
real 1m10.639s
user 7m25.864s
sys 0m49.235s
cache WB :
[timing 1, cache cold]
real 1m33.408s
user 7m27.852s
sys 1m47.623s
[timing 2, cache hot]
real 1m20.429s
user 7m30.668s
sys 1m46.895s
cache WC (write-combined) :
[timing 1, cache cold]
real 1m38.971s
user 7m27.800s
sys 2m18.241s
[timing 2, cache hot]
real 1m25.200s
user 7m30.040s
sys 2m18.201s
uncached :
[timing 1, cache cold]
real 1m37.237s
user 7m28.352s
sys 2m13.312s
[timing 2, cache hot]
real 1m24.303s
user 7m29.420s
sys 2m14.756s
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
---
ltt/ltt-relay-alloc.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
Index: linux-2.6-lttng/ltt/ltt-relay-alloc.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6-lttng.orig/ltt/ltt-relay-alloc.c 2008-10-02 17:02:42.000000000 -0400
+++ linux-2.6-lttng/ltt/ltt-relay-alloc.c 2008-10-02 17:07:48.000000000 -0400
@@ -26,6 +26,38 @@
static DEFINE_MUTEX(relay_channels_mutex);
static LIST_HEAD(relay_channels);
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86
+#include <asm/cacheflush.h>
+#include <asm/pat.h>
+
+/*
+ * TODO : create an abstraction in arch/x86
+ * Use write-combined pages if PAT is supported. Else, use uncached pages to
+ * make sure we don't evince really useful cachelines.
+ */
+static int arch_buffer_page_attr_set(struct page *page, int numpages)
+{
+ return set_memory_wc((unsigned long)page_address(page), numpages);
+ //return set_memory_uc((unsigned long)page_address(page), numpages);
+}
+
+static int arch_buffer_page_attr_clear(struct page *page, int numpages)
+{
+ return set_memory_wb((unsigned long)page_address(page), numpages);
+}
+#else
+static int arch_buffer_page_attr_set(struct page *page)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int arch_buffer_page_attr_clear(struct page *page)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+#endif
+
+
/**
* relay_alloc_buf - allocate a channel buffer
* @buf: the buffer struct
@@ -35,6 +67,7 @@ static int relay_alloc_buf(struct rchan_
{
unsigned int i, n_pages;
struct buf_page *buf_page, *n;
+ int ret;
*size = PAGE_ALIGN(*size);
n_pages = *size >> PAGE_SHIFT;
@@ -56,6 +89,8 @@ static int relay_alloc_buf(struct rchan_
buf_page->offset = (size_t)i << PAGE_SHIFT;
buf_page->buf = buf;
set_page_private(buf_page->page, (unsigned long)buf_page);
+ ret = arch_buffer_page_attr_set(buf_page->page, 1);
+ WARN_ON(ret);
if (i == 0) {
buf->wpage = buf_page;
buf->hpage[0] = buf_page;
@@ -69,6 +104,8 @@ static int relay_alloc_buf(struct rchan_
depopulate:
list_for_each_entry_safe(buf_page, n, &buf->pages, list) {
list_del_init(&buf_page->list);
+ ret = arch_buffer_page_attr_clear(buf_page->page, 1);
+ WARN_ON(ret);
__free_page(buf_page->page);
kfree(buf_page);
}
@@ -123,9 +160,12 @@ static void relay_destroy_buf(struct rch
{
struct rchan *chan = buf->chan;
struct buf_page *buf_page, *n;
+ int ret;
list_for_each_entry_safe(buf_page, n, &buf->pages, list) {
list_del_init(&buf_page->list);
+ ret = arch_buffer_page_attr_clear(buf_page->page, 1);
+ WARN_ON(ret);
__free_page(buf_page->page);
kfree(buf_page);
}
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists