linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/6] x86: prefetch

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]

Date:   Thu, 25 Feb 2021 17:32:53 +0000
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>
Cc:     Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] x86: prefetch_page() vDSO call

On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 04:56:50PM +0000, Nadav Amit wrote:
> 
> > On Feb 25, 2021, at 4:16 AM, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 11:29:04PM -0800, Nadav Amit wrote:
> >> Just as applications can use prefetch instructions to overlap
> >> computations and memory accesses, applications may want to overlap the
> >> page-faults and compute or overlap the I/O accesses that are required
> >> for page-faults of different pages.
> > 
> > Isn't this madvise(MADV_WILLNEED)?
> 
> Good point that I should have mentioned. In a way prefetch_page() a
> combination of mincore() and MADV_WILLNEED.
> 
> There are 4 main differences from MADV_WILLNEED:
> 
> 1. Much lower invocation cost if the readahead is not needed: this allows
> to prefetch pages more abundantly.

That seems like something that could be fixed in libc -- if we add a
page prefetch vdso call, an application calling posix_madvise() could
be implemented by calling this fast path.  Assuming the performance
increase justifies this extra complexity.

> 2. Return value: return value tells you whether the page is accessible.
> This makes it usable for coroutines, for instance. In this regard the
> call is more similar to mincore() than MADV_WILLNEED.

I don't quite understand the programming model you're describing here.

> 3. The PTEs are mapped if the pages are already present in the
> swap/page-cache, preventing an additional page-fault just to map them.

We could enhance madvise() to do this, no?

> 4. Avoiding heavy-weight reclamation on low memory (this may need to
> be selective, and can be integrated with MADV_WILLNEED).

Likewise.

I don't want to add a new Linux-specific call when there's already a
POSIX interface that communicates the exact same thing.  The return
value seems like the only problem.

https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/posix_madvise.html