linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] futex: Avoid taking hb lock if nothing to wakeup

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]

Message-ID: <CA+55aFwNPgzORGyKaziqBGqY9Uubuuo0w=rGQvcHS-Ftz4HQ9g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 2 Jan 2014 11:23:05 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@...e.com>,
	Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>,
	Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@...com>, Tom Vaden <tom.vaden@...com>,
	"Norton, Scott J" <scott.norton@...com>,
	"Chandramouleeswaran, Aswin" <aswin@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] futex: Avoid taking hb lock if nothing to wakeup

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:05 AM, Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com> wrote:
>
> In futex_wake() there is clearly no point in taking the hb->lock if we know
> beforehand that there are no tasks to be woken.

Btw, I think we could optimize this a bit further for the wakeup case.

wake_futex() does a get_task_struct(p)/put_task_struct(p) around its
actual waking logic, and I don't think that's necessary. The task
structures are RCU-delayed, and the task cannot go away until the
"q->lock_ptr = NULL" afaik, so you could replace that atomic inc/dec
with just a RCU read region.

Maybe it's not a big deal ("wake_up_state()" ends up getting the task
struct pi_lock anyway, so it's not like we can avoid toucing the task
structure), but I'm getting the feeling that we're doing a lot of
unnecessary work here.

This only triggers for the actual case of having a task to wake up,
though, so not your particular test load.

              Linus
--
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/