linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] sparc64: Add 16GB hugepage support

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, 20 Jul 2017 13:04:35 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     nitin.m.gupta@...cle.com
Cc:     mike.kravetz@...cle.com, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
        tom.hromatka@...cle.com, mhocko@...e.com, mingo@...nel.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, steve.capper@....com, hughd@...gle.com,
        punit.agrawal@....com, bob.picco@...cle.com,
        pasha.tatashin@...cle.com, steven.sistare@...cle.com,
        paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, thomas.tai@...cle.com,
        atish.patra@...cle.com, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] sparc64: Add 16GB hugepage support

From: Nitin Gupta <nitin.m.gupta@...cle.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 14:53:24 -0700

> Testing:
> 
> Tested with the stream benchmark which allocates 48G of
> arrays backed by 16G hugepages and does RW operation on
> them in parallel.

It would be great if we started adding tests under
tools/testing/selftests so that other people can recreate
your tests/benchmarks.

> diff --git a/arch/sparc/include/asm/tsb.h b/arch/sparc/include/asm/tsb.h
> index 32258e0..7b240a3 100644
> --- a/arch/sparc/include/asm/tsb.h
> +++ b/arch/sparc/include/asm/tsb.h
> @@ -195,6 +195,35 @@ extern struct tsb_phys_patch_entry __tsb_phys_patch, __tsb_phys_patch_end;
>  	 nop; \
>  699:
>  
> +	/* PUD has been loaded into REG1, interpret the value, seeing
> +	 * if it is a HUGE PUD or a normal one.  If it is not valid
> +	 * then jump to FAIL_LABEL.  If it is a HUGE PUD, and it
> +	 * translates to a valid PTE, branch to PTE_LABEL.
> +	 *
> +	 * We have to propagate bits [32:22] from the virtual address
> +	 * to resolve at 4M granularity.
> +	 */
> +#if defined(CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE) || defined(CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE)
> +#define USER_PGTABLE_CHECK_PUD_HUGE(VADDR, REG1, REG2, FAIL_LABEL, PTE_LABEL) \
> +	brz,pn		REG1, FAIL_LABEL;		\
> +	 sethi		%uhi(_PAGE_PUD_HUGE), REG2;	\
> +	sllx		REG2, 32, REG2;			\
> +	andcc		REG1, REG2, %g0;		\
> +	be,pt		%xcc, 700f;			\
> +	 sethi		%hi(0x1ffc0000), REG2;		\
> +	sllx		REG2, 1, REG2;			\
> +	brgez,pn	REG1, FAIL_LABEL;		\
> +	 andn		REG1, REG2, REG1;		\
> +	and		VADDR, REG2, REG2;		\
> +	brlz,pt		REG1, PTE_LABEL;		\
> +	 or		REG1, REG2, REG1;		\
> +700:
> +#else
> +#define USER_PGTABLE_CHECK_PUD_HUGE(VADDR, REG1, REG2, FAIL_LABEL, PTE_LABEL) \
> +	brz,pn		REG1, FAIL_LABEL; \
> +	 nop;
> +#endif
> +
>  	/* PMD has been loaded into REG1, interpret the value, seeing
>  	 * if it is a HUGE PMD or a normal one.  If it is not valid
>  	 * then jump to FAIL_LABEL.  If it is a HUGE PMD, and it
> @@ -242,6 +271,7 @@ extern struct tsb_phys_patch_entry __tsb_phys_patch, __tsb_phys_patch_end;
>  	srlx		REG2, 64 - PAGE_SHIFT, REG2; \
>  	andn		REG2, 0x7, REG2; \
>  	ldxa		[REG1 + REG2] ASI_PHYS_USE_EC, REG1; \
> +	USER_PGTABLE_CHECK_PUD_HUGE(VADDR, REG1, REG2, FAIL_LABEL, 800f) \
>  	brz,pn		REG1, FAIL_LABEL; \
>  	 sllx		VADDR, 64 - (PMD_SHIFT + PMD_BITS), REG2; \
>  	srlx		REG2, 64 - PAGE_SHIFT, REG2; \

This macro is getting way out of control, every TLB/TSB miss is
going to invoke this sequence of code.

Yes, it's just a two cycle constant load, a test modifying the
condition codes, and an easy to predict branch.

But every machine will eat this overhead, even if they don't use
hugepages or don't set the 16GB knob.

I think we can do better, using code patching or similar.

Once the knob is set, you can know for sure that this code path
will never actually be taken.