linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2.1 1/5] rcu: Introduce for_each_leaf_node

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:   Thu, 15 Dec 2016 15:29:43 +0000
From:   Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To:     Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "Paul E . McKenney " <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
        Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2.1 1/5] rcu: Introduce for_each_leaf_node_cpu()

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:21:05PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> There are some places inside RCU core, where we need to iterate all mask
> (->qsmask, ->expmask, etc) bits in a leaf node, in order to iterate all
> corresponding CPUs. The current code iterates all possible CPUs in this
> leaf node and then checks with the mask to see whether the bit is set.
> 
> However, given the fact that most bits in cpu_possible_mask are set but
> rare bits in an RCU leaf node mask are set(in other words, ->qsmask and
> its friends are usually more sparse than cpu_possible_mask), it's better
> to iterate in the other way, that is iterating mask bits in a leaf node.
> By doing so, we can save several checks in the loop, moreover, that fast
> path checking(e.g. ->qsmask == 0) could then be consolidated into the
> loop logic.
> 
> This patch introduce for_each_leaf_node_cpu() to iterate mask bits in a
> more efficient way.
> 
> By design, The CPUs whose bits are set in the leaf node masks should be
> a subset of possible CPUs, so we don't need extra check with
> cpu_possible(), however, a WARN_ON_ONCE() is put to check whether there
> are some nasty cases we miss, and we skip that "impossible" CPU in that
> case.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>

Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>

Thanks,
Mark.

> ---
>  kernel/rcu/tree.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.h b/kernel/rcu/tree.h
> index c0a4bf8f1ed0..b35da5b5dab1 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/tree.h
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.h
> @@ -295,6 +295,25 @@ struct rcu_node {
>  	     cpu <= rnp->grphi; \
>  	     cpu = cpumask_next((cpu), cpu_possible_mask))
>  
> +
> +#define MASK_BITS(mask)	(BITS_PER_BYTE * sizeof(mask))
> +/*
> + * Iterate over all CPUs a leaf RCU node which are still masked in
> + * @mask.
> + *
> + * Note @rnp has to be a leaf node and @mask has to belong to @rnp. And we
> + * assume that no CPU is masked in @mask but not set in cpu_possible_mask. IOW,
> + * masks of a leaf node never set a bit for an "impossible" CPU.
> + */
> +#define for_each_leaf_node_cpu(rnp, mask, cpu) \
> +	for ((cpu) = (rnp)->grplo + find_first_bit(&(mask), MASK_BITS(mask)); \
> +	     (cpu) <= (rnp)->grphi; \
> +	     (cpu) = (rnp)->grplo + find_next_bit(&(mask), MASK_BITS(mask), \
> +						  (cpu) - (rnp)->grplo + 1)) \
> +		if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!cpu_possible(cpu))) \
> +			continue; \
> +		else
> +
>  /*
>   * Union to allow "aggregate OR" operation on the need for a quiescent
>   * state by the normal and expedited grace periods.
> -- 
> 2.10.2
>