linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/64: Optimize the effective instruction cache footprint of kernel functions

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: <20150521132818.GA544@gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 21 May 2015 15:28:18 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
	Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"Chandramouleeswaran, Aswin" <aswin@...com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>,
	"linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org" 
	<linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/64: Optimize the effective instruction cache
 footprint of kernel functions


* Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com> wrote:

> Can you post your .config for the test?
> If you have CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y in your -Os test,
> consider re-testing with it turned off.

Yes, I had CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y.

With that turned off, on GCC 4.9.2, I'm seeing:

 fomalhaut:~/linux/linux-____CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y> size vmlinux.OPTIMIZE_INLINING\=*
     text           data     bss      dec            hex filename
 12150606        2565544 1634304 16350454         f97cf6 vmlinux.OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y
 12354814        2572520 1634304 16561638         fcb5e6 vmlinux.OPTIMIZE_INLINING=n

I.e. forcing the inlining increases the kernel size again, by about 
1.7%.

I re-ran the tests on the Intel system, and got these I$ miss rates:

linux-falign-functions=_64-bytes:                  647,853,942      L1-icache-load-misses                                         ( +-  0.07% )  (100.00%)
linux-falign-functions=_16-bytes:                  706,080,917      L1-icache-load-misses                                         ( +-  0.05% )  (100.00%)
linux-CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y+OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y:  921,910,808      L1-icache-load-misses                                         ( +-  0.05% )  (100.00%)
linux-CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y+OPTIMIZE_INLINING=n:  792,395,265      L1-icache-load-misses                                         ( +-  0.05% )  (100.00%)

So yeah, it got better - but the I$ cache miss rate is still 22.4% 
higher than that of the 64-bytes aligned kernel and 12.2% higher than 
the vanilla kernel.

Elapsed time had this original OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE result:

       8.531418784 seconds time elapsed                                          ( +-  0.19% )

this now improved to:

       7.686174880 seconds time elapsed                                          ( +-  0.18% )

but it's still much worse than the 64-byte aligned one:

       7.154816369 seconds time elapsed                                          ( +-  0.03% )

and the 16-byte aligned one:

       7.333597250 seconds time elapsed                                          ( +-  0.48% )

> You may be seeing this: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66122

Yeah, disabling OPTIMIZE_INLINING made a difference - but it didn't 
recover the performance loss, -Os is still 4.8% slower in this 
workload than the vanilla kernel.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/