linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc ticket locks

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: <20140210175325.GA27965@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Mon, 10 Feb 2014 18:53:25 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Torsten Duwe <duwe@....de>
Cc:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>,
	Tom Musta <tommusta@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc ticket locks

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 04:52:17PM +0100, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> Opinions, anyone?

Since the holder thing is a performance thing, not a correctness thing;
one thing you could do is something like:

static const int OWNER_HASH_SIZE = CONFIG_NR_CPUS * 4;
static const int OWNER_HASH_BITS = ilog2(OWNER_HASH_SIZE);

u16 lock_owner_array[OWNER_HASH_SIZE] = { 0, };

void set_owner(struct arch_spinlock_t *lock, int owner)
{
	int hash = hash_ptr(lock, OWNER_HASH_BITS);
	lock_owner_array[hash] = owner;
}

void yield_to_owner(struct arch_spinlock_t *lock)
{
	int hash = hash_ptr(lock, OWNER_HASH_BITS);
	int owner = lock_owner_array[hash];
	yield_to_cpu(owner);
}

And call set_owner() after the ticket lock is acquired, and don't bother
clearing it again; a new acquire will overwrite, a collision we have to
live with.

It should on average get you the right yield and does away with having
to track the owner field in place.

It does however get you an extra cacheline miss on acquire :/

One could consider patching it out when you know your kernel is not
running on an overloaded partition.
--
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/