linux-kernel - Re: Very slow clang kernel config ..

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:   Fri, 30 Apr 2021 19:16:42 -0700
From:   Fangrui Song <maskray@...gle.com>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Tom Stellard <tstellar@...hat.com>, felixonmars@...hlinux.org,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
        Serge Guelton <sguelton@...hat.com>,
        Sylvestre Ledru <sylvestre@...illa.com>
Subject: Re: Very slow clang kernel config ..

On 2021-04-30, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
>On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 6:22 PM Linus Torvalds
><torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 5:25 PM Nick Desaulniers
>> <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Ah, no, sorry, these are the runtime link editor/loader. So probably
>> > spending quite some time resolving symbols in large binaries.
>>
>> Yeah. Appended is the profile I see when I profile that "make
>> oldconfig", so about 45% of all time seems to be spent in just symbol
>> lookup and relocation.
>>
>> And a fair amount of time just creating and tearing down that huge
>> executable (with a lot of copy-on-write overhead too), with the kernel
>> side of that being another 15%. The cost of that is likely also fairly
>> directly linked to all the dynamic linking costs, which brings in all
>> that data.
>>
>> Just to compare, btw, this is the symbol lookup overhead for the gcc case:
>>
>>    1.43%  ld-2.33.so             do_lookup_x
>>    0.96%  ld-2.33.so             _dl_relocate_object
>>    0.69%  ld-2.33.so             _dl_lookup_symbol_x
>>
>> so it really does seem to be something very odd going on with the clang binary.
>>
>> Maybe the Fedora binary is built some odd way, but it's likely just
>> the default clang build.
>>
>>              Linus
>>
>> ----
>>   23.59%  ld-2.33.so          _dl_lookup_symbol_x
>>   11.41%  ld-2.33.so          _dl_relocate_object
>>    9.95%  ld-2.33.so          do_lookup_x
>>    4.00%  [kernel.vmlinux]    copy_page
>>    3.98%  [kernel.vmlinux]    next_uptodate_page
>>    3.05%  [kernel.vmlinux]    zap_pte_range
>>    1.81%  [kernel.vmlinux]    clear_page_rep
>>    1.68%  [kernel.vmlinux]    asm_exc_page_fault
>>    1.33%  ld-2.33.so          strcmp
>>    1.33%  ld-2.33.so          check_match
>
>47.61% spent in symbol table lookup. Nice. (Not counting probably a
>fair amount of the libc calls below).
>
>>    0.92%  libLLVM-12.so       llvm::StringMapImpl::LookupBucketFor
>
>^ wait a minute; notice how in your profile the `Shared Object` is
>attributed to `libLLVM-12.so` while mine is `clang-13`?  Clang can be
>built as either having libllvm statically linked or dynamically; see
>the cmake variables
>LLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB:BOOL
>LLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB:BOOL
>BUILD_SHARED_LIBS:BOOL
>https://llvm.org/docs/CMake.html
>
>I think those are frowned upon; useful for cutting down on developers
>iteration speed due to not having to relink llvm when developing
>clang. But shipping that in production? I just checked and it doesn't
>look like we do that for AOSP's build of LLVM.
>
>Tom, is one of the above intentionally set for clang builds on Fedora?
>I'm guessing it's intentional that there are packages for
>libLLVM-12.so and libclang-cpp.so.12, perhaps they have other
>dependents?

LLVM_LINK_LLVM_DYLIB (linking against libLLVM.so instead of libLLVM*.a)
has been around for a while.

Tom added CLANG_LINK_CLANG_DYLIB in 2019
(https://reviews.llvm.org/D63503 link against libclang-cpp.so instead of
libclang*.a or libclang*.so) :) So I'd guess this is a concious decision
for Fedora.

Arch Linux has switched to -DCLANG_LINK_CLANG_DYLIB=on as well
https://github.com/archlinux/svntogit-packages/blob/packages/clang/trunk/PKGBUILD
This is useful to make the total size of LLVM/clang dependent packages
(ccls, zig, etc) small.

If we don't let distributions use libLLVM.so libclang-cpp.so, hmmmm, I guess
their only choice will be crunchgen[1]-style
clang+lld+llvm-objcopy+llvm-objdump+llvm-ar+llvm-nm+llvm-strings+llvm-readelf+...+clang-format+clang-offload-bundler+...
(executables from packages which are usually named llvm, clang, and clang-tools)

[1]: https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=crunchgen&sektion=1

>>    0.83%  [kernel.vmlinux]    rmqueue_bulk
>>    0.77%  conf                yylex
>>    0.75%  libc-2.33.so        __gconv_transform_utf8_internal
>>    0.74%  libc-2.33.so        _int_malloc
>>    0.69%  libc-2.33.so        __strlen_avx2
>>    0.62%  [kernel.vmlinux]    pagecache_get_page
>>    0.58%  [kernel.vmlinux]    page_remove_rmap
>>    0.56%  [kernel.vmlinux]    __handle_mm_fault
>>    0.54%  [kernel.vmlinux]    filemap_map_pages
>>    0.54%  libc-2.33.so        __strcmp_avx2
>>    0.54%  [kernel.vmlinux]    __free_one_page
>>    0.52%  [kernel.vmlinux]    release_pages
>-- 
>Thanks,
>~Nick Desaulniers