linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v3 for 4.15 08/24] Provide cpu

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:   Fri, 17 Nov 2017 21:22:04 +0100 (CET)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
cc:     Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-api <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andrew Hunter <ahh@...gle.com>,
        Chris Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Ben Maurer <bmaurer@...com>,
        rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 for 4.15 08/24] Provide cpu_opv system call

On Fri, 17 Nov 2017, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> ----- On Nov 17, 2017, at 5:09 AM, Thomas Gleixner tglx@...utronix.de wrote:
> 7) Allow libraries with multi-part algorithms to work on same per-cpu
>    data without affecting the allowed cpu mask
> 
> I stumbled on an interesting use-case within the lttng-ust tracer
> per-cpu buffers: the algorithm needs to update a "reserve" counter,
> serialize data into the buffer, and then update a "commit" counter
> _on the same per-cpu buffer_. My goal is to use rseq for both reserve
> and commit.
> 
> Clearly, if rseq reserve fails, the algorithm can retry on a different
> per-cpu buffer. However, it's not that easy for the commit. It needs to
> be performed on the same per-cpu buffer as the reserve.
> 
> The cpu_opv system call solves that problem by receiving the cpu number
> on which the operation needs to be performed as argument. It can push
> the task to the right CPU if needed, and perform the operations there
> with preemption disabled.

If your transaction cannot be done in one go, then abusing that byte code
interpreter for concluding it is just hillarious. That whole exercise is a
gazillion times slower than the atomic operations which are neccesary to do
it without all that.

I'm even more convinced now that this is overengineered beyond repair.

Thanks,

	tglx