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:   Wed, 19 Feb 2020 09:27:22 -0700
From:   shuah <shuah@...nel.org>
To:     André Almeida <andrealmeid@...labora.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Cc:     kernel@...labora.com, krisman@...labora.com,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
        ryao@...too.org, peterz@...radead.org, dvhart@...radead.org,
        mingo@...hat.com, z.figura12@...il.com, steven@...vesoftware.com,
        pgriffais@...vesoftware.com, steven@...uorix.net,
        shuah <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] Implement FUTEX_WAIT_MULTIPLE operation

On 2/13/20 2:45 PM, André Almeida wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> This patchset implements a new futex operation, called FUTEX_WAIT_MULTIPLE,
> which allows a thread to wait on several futexes at the same time, and be
> awoken by any of them.
> 
> The use case lies in the Wine implementation of the Windows NT interface
> WaitMultipleObjects. This Windows API function allows a thread to sleep
> waiting on the first of a set of event sources (mutexes, timers, signal,
> console input, etc) to signal.  Considering this is a primitive
> synchronization operation for Windows applications, being able to quickly
> signal events on the producer side, and quickly go to sleep on the
> consumer side is essential for good performance of those running over Wine.
> 
> Since this API exposes a mechanism to wait on multiple objects, and
> we might have multiple waiters for each of these events, a M->N
> relationship, the current Linux interfaces fell short on performance
> evaluation of large M,N scenarios.  We experimented, for instance, with
> eventfd, which has performance problems discussed below, but we also
> experimented with userspace solutions, like making each consumer wait on
> a condition variable guarding the entire list of objects, and then
> waking up multiple variables on the producer side, but this is
> prohibitively expensive since we either need to signal many condition
> variables or share that condition variable among multiple waiters, and
> then verify for the event being signaled in userspace, which means
> dealing with often false positive wakes ups.
> 
> The natural interface to implement the behavior we want, also
> considering that one of the waitable objects is a mutex itself, would be
> the futex interface.  Therefore, this patchset proposes a mechanism for
> a thread to wait on multiple futexes at once, and wake up on the first
> futex that was awaken.
> 
> In particular, using futexes in our Wine use case reduced the CPU
> utilization by 4% for the game Beat Saber and by 1.5% for the game
> Shadow of Tomb Raider, both running over Proton (a Wine based solution
> for Windows emulation), when compared to the eventfd interface. This
> implementation also doesn't rely of file descriptors, so it doesn't risk
> overflowing the resource.
> 
> In time, we are also proposing modifications to glibc and libpthread to
> make this feature available for Linux native multithreaded applications
> using libpthread, which can benefit from the behavior of waiting on any
> of a group of futexes.
> 
> Technically, the existing FUTEX_WAIT implementation can be easily
> reworked by using futex_wait_multiple() with a count of one, and I
> have a patch showing how it works.  I'm not proposing it, since
> futex is such a tricky code, that I'd be more comfortable to have
> FUTEX_WAIT_MULTIPLE running upstream for a couple development cycles,
> before considering modifying FUTEX_WAIT.
> 
> The patch series includes an extensive set of kselftests validating
> the behavior of the interface.  We also implemented support[1] on
> Syzkaller and survived the fuzzy testing.
> 
> Finally, if you'd rather pull directly a branch with this set you can
> find it here:
> 
> https://gitlab.collabora.com/tonyk/linux/commits/futex-dev-v3
> 
> The RFC for this patch can be found here:
> 
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/7/30/1399
> 
> === Performance of eventfd ===
> 
> Polling on several eventfd contexts with semaphore semantics would
> provide us with the exact semantics we are looking for.  However, as
> shown below, in a scenario with sufficient producers and consumers, the
> eventfd interface itself becomes a bottleneck, in particular because
> each thread will compete to acquire a sequence of waitqueue locks for
> each eventfd context in the poll list. In addition, in the uncontended
> case, where the producer is ready for consumption, eventfd still
> requires going into the kernel on the consumer side.
> 
> When a write or a read operation in an eventfd file succeeds, it will try
> to wake up all threads that are waiting to perform some operation to
> the file. The lock (ctx->wqh.lock) that hold the access to the file value
> (ctx->count) is the same lock used to control access the waitqueue. When
> all those those thread woke, they will compete to get this lock. Along
> with that, the poll() also manipulates the waitqueue and need to hold
> this same lock. This lock is specially hard to acquire when poll() calls
> poll_freewait(), where it tries to free all waitqueues associated with
> this poll. While doing that, it will compete with a lot of read and
> write operations that have been waken.
> 
> In our use case, with a huge number of parallel reads, writes and polls,
> this lock is a bottleneck and hurts the performance of applications. Our
> implementation of futex, however, decrease the calls of spin lock by more
> than 80% in some user applications.
> 
> Finally, eventfd operates on file descriptors, which is a limited
> resource that has shown its limitation in our use cases.  Despite the
> Windows interface not waiting on more than 64 objects at once, we still
> have multiple waiters at the same time, and we were easily able to
> exhaust the FD limits on applications like games.
> 
> Thanks,
>      André
> 
> [1] https://github.com/andrealmeid/syzkaller/tree/futex-wait-multiple
> 
> Gabriel Krisman Bertazi (4):
>    futex: Implement mechanism to wait on any of several futexes
>    selftests: futex: Add FUTEX_WAIT_MULTIPLE timeout test
>    selftests: futex: Add FUTEX_WAIT_MULTIPLE wouldblock test
>    selftests: futex: Add FUTEX_WAIT_MULTIPLE wake up test
> 
>   include/uapi/linux/futex.h                    |  20 +
>   kernel/futex.c                                | 358 +++++++++++++++++-
>   .../selftests/futex/functional/.gitignore     |   1 +
>   .../selftests/futex/functional/Makefile       |   3 +-
>   .../futex/functional/futex_wait_multiple.c    | 173 +++++++++
>   .../futex/functional/futex_wait_timeout.c     |  38 +-
>   .../futex/functional/futex_wait_wouldblock.c  |  28 +-
>   .../testing/selftests/futex/functional/run.sh |   3 +
>   .../selftests/futex/include/futextest.h       |  22 ++
>   9 files changed, 639 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>   create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/futex/functional/futex_wait_multiple.c
> 

For selftests:

Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>

thanks,
-- Shuah

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ