[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180220161634.517598ec63ec4a785c4c81cc@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 16:16:34 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] kernel/fork: switch vmapped stack callation to
__vmalloc_area()
On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 16:57:21 +0300 Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru> wrote:
> # stress-ng --clone 100 -t 10s --metrics-brief
> at 32-core machine shows boost 35000 -> 36000 bogo ops
>
> Patch 4/4 is a kind of RFC.
> Actually per-cpu cache of preallocated stacks works faster than buddy allocator thus
> performance boots for it happens only at completely insane rate of clones.
>
I'm not really sure what to make of this patchset. Is it useful in any
known real-world use cases?
> + This option neutralize stack overflow protection but allows to
> + achieve best performance for syscalls fork() and clone().
That sounds problematic, but perhaps acceptable if the fallback only
happens rarely.
Can this code be folded into CONFIG_VMAP_STACk in some cleaner fashion?
We now have options for non-vmapped stacks, vmapped stacks and a mix
of both.
And what about this comment in arch/Kconfig:VMAP_STACK:
This is presently incompatible with KASAN because KASAN expects
the stack to map directly to the KASAN shadow map using a formula
that is incorrect if the stack is in vmalloc space.
So VMAP_STACK_AS_FALLBACK will intermittently break KASAN?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists