linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] x86, vdso, pvclock: Simplify and speed up the vdso pvclock reader

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: <56694153.7020309@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 10 Dec 2015 10:09:39 +0100
From:	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] x86, vdso, pvclock: Simplify and speed up the vdso
 pvclock reader



On 10/12/2015 00:12, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
> 
> The pvclock vdso code was too abstracted to understand easily and
> excessively paranoid.  Simplify it for a huge speedup.
> 
> This opens the door for additional simplifications, as the vdso no
> longer accesses the pvti for any vcpu other than vcpu 0.
> 
> Before, vclock_gettime using kvm-clock took about 45ns on my machine.
> With this change, it takes 29ns, which is almost as fast as the pure TSC
> implementation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
> ---
>  arch/x86/entry/vdso/vclock_gettime.c | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>  1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/vdso/vclock_gettime.c b/arch/x86/entry/vdso/vclock_gettime.c
> index ca94fa649251..c325ba1bdddf 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/entry/vdso/vclock_gettime.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/entry/vdso/vclock_gettime.c
> @@ -78,47 +78,58 @@ static notrace const struct pvclock_vsyscall_time_info *get_pvti(int cpu)
>  
>  static notrace cycle_t vread_pvclock(int *mode)
>  {
> -	const struct pvclock_vsyscall_time_info *pvti;
> +	const struct pvclock_vcpu_time_info *pvti = &get_pvti(0)->pvti;
>  	cycle_t ret;
> -	u64 last;
> -	u32 version;
> -	u8 flags;
> -	unsigned cpu, cpu1;
> -
> +	u64 tsc, pvti_tsc;
> +	u64 last, delta, pvti_system_time;
> +	u32 version, pvti_tsc_to_system_mul, pvti_tsc_shift;
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * Note: hypervisor must guarantee that:
> -	 * 1. cpu ID number maps 1:1 to per-CPU pvclock time info.
> -	 * 2. that per-CPU pvclock time info is updated if the
> -	 *    underlying CPU changes.
> -	 * 3. that version is increased whenever underlying CPU
> -	 *    changes.
> +	 * Note: The kernel and hypervisor must guarantee that cpu ID
> +	 * number maps 1:1 to per-CPU pvclock time info.
> +	 *
> +	 * Because the hypervisor is entirely unaware of guest userspace
> +	 * preemption, it cannot guarantee that per-CPU pvclock time
> +	 * info is updated if the underlying CPU changes or that that
> +	 * version is increased whenever underlying CPU changes.
>  	 *
> +	 * On KVM, we are guaranteed that pvti updates for any vCPU are
> +	 * atomic as seen by *all* vCPUs.  This is an even stronger
> +	 * guarantee than we get with a normal seqlock.
> +	 *
> +	 * On Xen, we don't appear to have that guarantee, but Xen still
> +	 * supplies a valid seqlock using the version field.
> +
> +	 * We only do pvclock vdso timing at all if
> +	 * PVCLOCK_TSC_STABLE_BIT is set, and we interpret that bit to
> +	 * mean that all vCPUs have matching pvti and that the TSC is
> +	 * synced, so we can just look at vCPU 0's pvti.
>  	 */
> -	do {
> -		cpu = __getcpu() & VGETCPU_CPU_MASK;
> -		/* TODO: We can put vcpu id into higher bits of pvti.version.
> -		 * This will save a couple of cycles by getting rid of
> -		 * __getcpu() calls (Gleb).
> -		 */
> -
> -		pvti = get_pvti(cpu);
> -
> -		version = __pvclock_read_cycles(&pvti->pvti, &ret, &flags);
> -
> -		/*
> -		 * Test we're still on the cpu as well as the version.
> -		 * We could have been migrated just after the first
> -		 * vgetcpu but before fetching the version, so we
> -		 * wouldn't notice a version change.
> -		 */
> -		cpu1 = __getcpu() & VGETCPU_CPU_MASK;
> -	} while (unlikely(cpu != cpu1 ||
> -			  (pvti->pvti.version & 1) ||
> -			  pvti->pvti.version != version));
> -
> -	if (unlikely(!(flags & PVCLOCK_TSC_STABLE_BIT)))
> +
> +	if (unlikely(!(pvti->flags & PVCLOCK_TSC_STABLE_BIT))) {
>  		*mode = VCLOCK_NONE;
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	do {
> +		version = pvti->version;
> +
> +		/* This is also a read barrier, so we'll read version first. */
> +		tsc = rdtsc_ordered();
> +
> +		pvti_tsc_to_system_mul = pvti->tsc_to_system_mul;
> +		pvti_tsc_shift = pvti->tsc_shift;
> +		pvti_system_time = pvti->system_time;
> +		pvti_tsc = pvti->tsc_timestamp;
> +
> +		/* Make sure that the version double-check is last. */
> +		smp_rmb();
> +	} while (unlikely((version & 1) || version != pvti->version));
> +
> +	delta = tsc - pvti_tsc;
> +	ret = pvti_system_time +
> +		pvclock_scale_delta(delta, pvti_tsc_to_system_mul,
> +				    pvti_tsc_shift);
>  
>  	/* refer to tsc.c read_tsc() comment for rationale */
>  	last = gtod->cycle_last;
> 

Reviewed-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
--
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/