linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: Optimize the TLB flush of sys_mprotect() and change

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:	Wed, 14 Nov 2012 13:39:15 -0500
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: Optimize the TLB flush of sys_mprotect() and
 change_protection() users

On 11/14/2012 03:50 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Reuse the NUMA code's 'modified page protections' count that
> change_protection() computes and skip the TLB flush if there's
> no changes to a range that sys_mprotect() modifies.
>
> Given that mprotect() already optimizes the same-flags case
> I expected this optimization to dominantly trigger on
> CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING=y kernels - but even with that feature
> disabled it triggers rather often.
>
> There's two reasons for that:
>
> 1)
>
> While sys_mprotect() already optimizes the same-flag case:
>
>          if (newflags == oldflags) {
>                  *pprev = vma;
>                  return 0;
>          }
>
> and this test works in many cases, but it is too sharp in some
> others, where it differentiates between protection values that the
> underlying PTE format makes no distinction about, such as
> PROT_EXEC == PROT_READ on x86.
>
> 2)
>
> Even where the pte format over vma flag changes necessiates a
> modification of the pagetables, there might be no pagetables
> yet to modify: they might not be instantiated yet.
>
> During a regular desktop bootup this optimization hits a couple
> of hundred times. During a Java test I measured thousands of
> hits.
>
> So this optimization improves sys_mprotect() in general, not just
> CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING=y kernels.
>
> [ We could further increase the efficiency of this optimization if
>    change_pte_range() and change_huge_pmd() was a bit smarter about
>    recognizing exact-same-value protection masks - when the hardware
>    can do that safely. This would probably further speed up mprotect(). ]
>
> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
> Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> ---
>   mm/mprotect.c | 5 ++++-
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/mprotect.c b/mm/mprotect.c
> index ce0377b..6ff2d5e 100644
> --- a/mm/mprotect.c
> +++ b/mm/mprotect.c
> @@ -145,7 +145,10 @@ static unsigned long change_protection_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>   		pages += change_pud_range(vma, pgd, addr, next, newprot,
>   				 dirty_accountable);
>   	} while (pgd++, addr = next, addr != end);
> -	flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end);
> +
> +	/* Only flush the TLB if we actually modified any entries: */
> +	if (pages)
> +		flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end);
>
>   	return pages;
>   }

Ahh, this explains why the previous patch does what it does.

Would be nice to have that explained in the changelog for that patch,
too :)

-- 
All rights reversed
--
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/