linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1 13/50] Avoid some useless msecs/jiffies conversions

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200329211316.GG4675@SDF.ORG>
Date:   Sun, 29 Mar 2020 21:18:14 +0000
From:   George Spelvin <lkml@....ORG>
To:     James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc:     Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        Marek Lindner <mareklindner@...mailbox.ch>,
        Simon Wunderlich <sw@...onwunderlich.de>,
        Antonio Quartulli <a@...table.cc>,
        Sven Eckelmann <sven@...fation.org>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
        lkml@....org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 13/50] Avoid some useless msecs/jiffies conversions

On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 11:16:47AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Sun, 2020-03-29 at 17:50 +0000, George Spelvin wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 07:13:33PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>>> Fair enough.  But it's still a question whether an open code X * HZ
>>> is good at all...
>> 
>> I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "good at all" here.
>> The value computed is exactly the same.
> 
> I think he means what the compiler does with it.
> 
> We all assume that msecs_to_jiffies is properly optimized so there
> should be no need to open code it like you're proposing.  So firstly
> can you produce the assembly that shows the worse output from
> msecs_to_jiffies?  If there is a problem, then we should be fixing it
> in msecs_to_jiffies, not adding open coding.

Fair enough.  For the two alternative functions:

#include <linux/jiffies.h>

unsigned long timeout1(unsigned seconds)
{
	return jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(seconds * 1000);
}

unsigned long timeout2(unsigned seconds)
{
	return jiffies + seconds * HZ;
}

compiled with Kbuild, the object code produced is:

Disassembly of section .text:

0000000000000000 <timeout1>:
   0:	69 ff e8 03 00 00       imul   $0x3e8,%edi,%edi
   6:	e8 00 00 00 00          callq  b <timeout1+0xb>
                        7: R_X86_64_PLT32       __msecs_to_jiffies-0x4
   b:	49 89 c0                mov    %rax,%r8
   e:	48 8b 05 00 00 00 00    mov    0x0(%rip),%rax        # 15 
<timeout1+0x15>
                        11: R_X86_64_PC32       jiffies-0x4
  15:	4c 01 c0                add    %r8,%rax
  18:	c3                      retq   
  19:	0f 1f 80 00 00 00 00    nopl   0x0(%rax)

0000000000000020 <timeout2>:
  20:	48 8b 15 00 00 00 00    mov    0x0(%rip),%rdx        # 27 
<timeout2+0x7>
                        23: R_X86_64_PC32       jiffies-0x4
  27:	69 c7 2c 01 00 00       imul   $0x12c,%edi,%eax
  2d:	48 01 d0                add    %rdx,%rax
  30:	c3                      retq   

This is the type of code I replaced: code where the number of seconds
is not known at compile time.  Notice how the first multiplies by 1000
and then calls __msecs_to_jiffies.  The second multiplies by 300 and
makes no function call.

__msecs_to_jiffies (from kernel/time/time.o) is:

0000000000000100 <__msecs_to_jiffies>:
     100:	48 b8 fe ff ff ff ff    movabs $0x3ffffffffffffffe,%rax
     107:	ff ff 3f 
     10a:	85 ff                   test   %edi,%edi
     10c:	78 1c                   js     12a 
<__msecs_to_jiffies+0x2a>
     10e:	b8 9a 99 99 99          mov    $0x9999999a,%eax
     113:	89 ff                   mov    %edi,%edi
     115:	48 0f af f8             imul   %rax,%rdi
     119:	48 b8 cc cc cc cc 01    movabs $0x1cccccccc,%rax
     120:	00 00 00 
     123:	48 01 f8                add    %rdi,%rax
     126:	48 c1 e8 21             shr    $0x21,%rax
     12a:	c3                      retq   
     12b:	0f 1f 44 00 00          nopl   0x0(%rax,%rax,1)

I didn't try to replace code that uses compile-time constant arguments
such as include/linux/ceph/libceph.h.