linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: simplify kmem cgroup charge/uncharge code

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CALvZod56cWta66q4w4ndiPmgfVGkViAFfivh8L8eUBPqJRWFCg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 Dec 2020 09:12:23 -0800
From:   Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
To:     Hui Su <sh_def@....com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: simplify kmem cgroup charge/uncharge code

+Michal Hocko

Message starts at https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201207142204.GA18516@rlk

On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 10:08 PM Hui Su <sh_def@....com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 09:28:46AM -0800, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 6:22 AM Hui Su <sh_def@....com> wrote:
> >
> > The reason to keep __memcg_kmem_[un]charge_page functions is that they
> > were called in the very hot path. Can you please check the performance
> > impact of your change and if the generated code is actually same or
> > different.
>
> Hi, Shakeel:
>
> I objdump the mm/page_alloc.o and comapre them, it change the assemble code
> indeed. In fact, it change some code order, which i personally think won't have
> impact on performance. And i ran the ltp mm and conatiner test, it seems nothing
> abnormal.

Did you run the tests in a memcg? The change is behind a static key of
kmem accounting which is enabled for subcontainers.

>
> BUT i still want to check whether this change will have negative impact on
> perforance due to this change code was called in the very hot path like you
> said, AND saddly i did not find a way to quantify the impact on performance.
> Can you give me some suggestion about how to quantify the performance or some
> tool?
>

At least I think we can try with a simple page allocation in a loop
i.e. alloc_page(GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT). I will think of any existing
benchmark which exercises this code path.

Michal, do you have any suggestions?