linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/9] smp: Run functions concurrently in smp_call_function

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <98DE1002-07A4-450A-BE13-CE2B5D0CB89C@vmware.com>
Date:   Mon, 26 Aug 2019 16:25:58 +0000
From:   Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
CC:     the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/9] smp: Run functions concurrently in
 smp_call_function_many()

> On Aug 23, 2019, at 3:41 PM, Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com> wrote:
> 
> Currently, on_each_cpu() and similar functions do not exploit the
> potential of concurrency: the function is first executed remotely and
> only then it is executed locally. Functions such as TLB flush can take
> considerable time, so this provides an opportunity for performance
> optimization.
> 
> To do so, introduce __smp_call_function_many(), which allows the callers
> to provide local and remote functions that should be executed, and run
> them concurrently. Keep smp_call_function_many() semantic as it is today
> for backward compatibility: the called function is not executed in this
> case locally.
> 
> __smp_call_function_many() does not use the optimized version for a
> single remote target that smp_call_function_single() implements. For
> synchronous function call, smp_call_function_single() keeps a
> call_single_data (which is used for synchronization) on the stack.
> Interestingly, it seems that not using this optimization provides
> greater performance improvements (greater speedup with a single remote
> target than with multiple ones). Presumably, holding data structures
> that are intended for synchronization on the stack can introduce
> overheads due to TLB misses and false-sharing when the stack is used for
> other purposes.
> 
> Adding support to run the functions concurrently required to remove a
> micro-optimization in on_each_cpu() that disabled/enabled IRQs instead
> of saving/restoring them. The benefit of running the local and remote
> code concurrently is expected to be greater.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
> Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>
> ---
> include/linux/smp.h |  34 ++++++++---
> kernel/smp.c        | 138 +++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> 2 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 80 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/smp.h b/include/linux/smp.h
> index 6fc856c9eda5..d18d54199635 100644
> --- a/include/linux/smp.h
> +++ b/include/linux/smp.h
> @@ -32,11 +32,6 @@ extern unsigned int total_cpus;
> int smp_call_function_single(int cpuid, smp_call_func_t func, void *info,
> 			     int wait);
> 
> -/*
> - * Call a function on all processors
> - */
> -void on_each_cpu(smp_call_func_t func, void *info, int wait);
> -
> /*
>  * Call a function on processors specified by mask, which might include
>  * the local one.
> @@ -44,6 +39,17 @@ void on_each_cpu(smp_call_func_t func, void *info, int wait);
> void on_each_cpu_mask(const struct cpumask *mask, smp_call_func_t func,
> 		void *info, bool wait);
> 
> +/*
> + * Call a function on all processors.  May be used during early boot while
> + * early_boot_irqs_disabled is set.
> + */
> +static inline void on_each_cpu(smp_call_func_t func, void *info, int wait)
> +{
> +	preempt_disable();
> +	on_each_cpu_mask(cpu_online_mask, func, info, wait);
> +	preempt_enable();
> +}

Err.. I made this change the last minute before sending, and apparently
forgot to build, since it does not build.

Let me know if there is anything else with this version, though.