| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <tencent_B1290D581DF1837711F4DB176ACB4D4F6908@qq.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2022 11:07:44 +0800
From: "zhangfei.gao@...mail.com" <zhangfei.gao@...mail.com>
To: Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@...cinc.com>, paulmck@...nel.org,
zhangfei <zhangfei.gao@...aro.org>
Cc: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"rcu@...r.kernel.org" <rcu@...r.kernel.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
"mtosatti@...hat.com" <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Auger Eric <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
"chenxiang (M)" <chenxiang66@...ilicon.com>
Subject: Re: Commit 282d8998e997 (srcu: Prevent expedited GPs and blocking
readers from consuming CPU) cause qemu boot slow
On 2022/6/15 下午6:40, Neeraj Upadhyay wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 6/15/2022 2:33 PM, zhangfei.gao@...mail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2022/6/14 下午10:17, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 10:03:35PM +0800, zhangfei.gao@...mail.com
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 2022/6/14 下午8:19, Neeraj Upadhyay wrote:
>>>>>> 5.18-rc4 based ~8sec
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 5.19-rc1 ~2m43sec
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 5.19-rc1+fix1 ~19sec
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 5.19-rc1-fix2 ~19sec
>>>>>>
>>>>> If you try below diff on top of either 5.19-rc1+fix1 or
>>>>> 5.19-rc1-fix2 ;
>>>>> does it show any difference in boot time?
>>>>>
>>>>> --- a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
>>>>> +++ b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
>>>>> @@ -706,7 +706,7 @@ static void srcu_schedule_cbs_snp(struct
>>>>> srcu_struct
>>>>> *ssp, struct srcu_node *snp
>>>>> */
>>>>> static void srcu_gp_end(struct srcu_struct *ssp)
>>>>> {
>>>>> - unsigned long cbdelay;
>>>>> + unsigned long cbdelay = 1;
>>>>> bool cbs;
>>>>> bool last_lvl;
>>>>> int cpu;
>>>>> @@ -726,7 +726,9 @@ static void srcu_gp_end(struct srcu_struct *ssp)
>>>>> spin_lock_irq_rcu_node(ssp);
>>>>> idx = rcu_seq_state(ssp->srcu_gp_seq);
>>>>> WARN_ON_ONCE(idx != SRCU_STATE_SCAN2);
>>>>> - cbdelay = !!srcu_get_delay(ssp);
>>>>> + if (ULONG_CMP_LT(READ_ONCE(ssp->srcu_gp_seq),
>>>>> READ_ONCE(ssp->srcu_gp_seq_needed_exp)))
>>>>> + cbdelay = 0;
>>>>> +
>>>>> WRITE_ONCE(ssp->srcu_last_gp_end, ktime_get_mono_fast_ns());
>>> Thank you both for the testing and the proposed fix!
>>>
>>>> Test here:
>>>> qemu: https://github.com/qemu/qemu/tree/stable-6.1
>>>> kernel:
>>>> https://github.com/Linaro/linux-kernel-uadk/tree/uacce-devel-5.19-srcu-test
>>>>
>>>> (in case test patch not clear, push in git tree)
>>>>
>>>> Hardware: aarch64
>>>>
>>>> 1. 5.18-rc6
>>>> real 0m8.402s
>>>> user 0m3.015s
>>>> sys 0m1.102s
>>>>
>>>> 2. 5.19-rc1
>>>> real 2m41.433s
>>>> user 0m3.097s
>>>> sys 0m1.177s
>>>>
>>>> 3. 5.19-rc1 + fix1 from Paul
>>>> real 2m43.404s
>>>> user 0m2.880s
>>>> sys 0m1.214s
>>>>
>>>> 4. 5.19-rc1 + fix2: fix1 + Remove "if (!jbase)" block
>>>> real 0m15.262s
>>>> user 0m3.003s
>>>> sys 0m1.033s
>>>>
>>>> When build kernel in the meantime, load time become longer.
>>>>
>>>> 5. 5.19-rc1 + fix3: fix1 + SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 1000000
>>>> real 0m15.215s
>>>> user 0m2.942s
>>>> sys 0m1.172s
>>>>
>>>> 6. 5.19-rc1 + fix4: fix1 + Neeraj's change of srcu_gp_end
>>>> real 1m23.936s
>>>> user 0m2.969s
>>>> sys 0m1.181s
>>> And thank you for the testing!
>>>
>>> Could you please try fix3 + Neeraj's change of srcu_gp_end?
>>>
>>> That is, fix1 + SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 1000000 + Neeraj's change of
>>> srcu_gp_end.
>>>
>>> Also, at what value of SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE do the boot
>>> times start rising? This is probably best done by starting with
>>> SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE=100000 and dividing by (say) ten on each run
>>> until boot time becomes slow, followed by a binary search between the
>>> last two values. (The idea is to bias the search so that fast boot
>>> times are the common case.)
>>
>> SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 100 becomes slower.
>>
>>
>> 8. 5.19-rc1 + fix6: fix4 + SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 1000000
>>
>> real 0m11.154s ~12s
>>
>> user 0m2.919s
>>
>> sys 0m1.064s
>>
>>
>>
>> 9. 5.19-rc1 + fix7: fix4 + SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 10000
>>
>> real 0m11.258s
>>
>> user 0m3.113s
>>
>> sys 0m1.073s
>>
>>
>>
>> 10. 5.19-rc1 + fix8: fix4 + SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 100
>>
>> real 0m30.053s ~ 32s
>>
>> user 0m2.827s
>>
>> sys 0m1.161s
>>
>>
>>
>> By the way, if build kernel on the board in the meantime (using
>> memory), time become much longer.
>>
>> real 1m2.763s
>>
>>
>>
>> 11. 5.19-rc1 + fix9: fix4 + SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 1000
>>
>> real 0m11.443s
>>
>> user 0m3.022s
>>
>> sys 0m1.052s
>>
>>
>
> This is useful data, thanks! Did you get chance to check between 100
> and 1000, to narrow down further, from which point (does need to be
> exact value) between 100 and 1000, you start seeing degradation at,
> for ex. 250, 500 , ...?
>
> Is it also possible to try experiment 10 and 11 with below diff.
> What I have done in below diff is, call srcu_get_delay() only once
> in try_check_zero() (and not for every loop iteration); also
> retry with a different delay for the extra iteration which is done
> when srcu_get_delay(ssp) returns 0.
>
> Once we have this data, can you also try by changing
> SRCU_RETRY_CHECK_LONG_DELAY to 100, on top of below diff.
>
> #define SRCU_RETRY_CHECK_LONG_DELAY 100
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> diff --git a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> index 6a354368ac1d..3aff2f3e99ab 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcu/srcutree.c
> @@ -620,6 +620,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__srcu_read_unlock);
> * we repeatedly block for 1-millisecond time periods.
> */
> #define SRCU_RETRY_CHECK_DELAY 5
> +#define SRCU_RETRY_CHECK_LONG_DELAY 5
>
> /*
> * Start an SRCU grace period.
> @@ -927,12 +928,17 @@ static void srcu_funnel_gp_start(struct
> srcu_struct *ssp, struct srcu_data *sdp,
> */
> static bool try_check_zero(struct srcu_struct *ssp, int idx, int
> trycount)
> {
> + unsigned long curdelay;
> + curdelay = !srcu_get_delay(ssp);
> for (;;) {
> if (srcu_readers_active_idx_check(ssp, idx))
> return true;
> - if (--trycount + !srcu_get_delay(ssp) <= 0)
> + if (--trycount + curdelay <= 0)
> return false;
> - udelay(SRCU_RETRY_CHECK_DELAY);
> + if (trycount)
> + udelay(SRCU_RETRY_CHECK_DELAY);
> + else
> + udelay(SRCU_RETRY_CHECK_LONG_DELAY);
> }
> }
>
11. 5.19-rc1 + fix9: fix4 + SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 1000
real 0m11.443
s user 0m3.022
s sys 0m1.052s
fix10: fix4 + SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 500
real 0m11.401s
user 0m2.798s
sys 0m1.328s
fix11: fix4 + SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 250
real 0m15.748s
user 0m2.781s
sys 0m1.294s
fix12: fix4 + SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 200
real 0m20.704s 21
user 0m2.954s
sys 0m1.226s
fix13: fix4 + SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 150
real 0m25.151s
user 0m2.980s
sys 0m1.256s
fix8: fix4 + SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 100
real 0m30.053s ~ 32s
user 0m2.827s
sys 0m1.161s
fix14: fix4 + SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 100 + SRCU_RETRY_CHECK_LONG_DELAY 5
real 0m19.263s
user 0m3.018s
sys 0m1.211s
fix15: fix4 + SRCU_MAX_NODELAY_PHASE 100 +
SRCU_RETRY_CHECK_LONG_DELAY 100
real 0m9.347s
user 0m3.132s
sys 0m1.041s
And Shameer suggests this method, to decrease region_add/del time from
6000+ to 200+, also works on 5.19-rc1
Make the EFI flash image file
$ dd if=/dev/zero of=flash0.img bs=1M count=64
$ dd if=./QEMU_EFI-2022.fd of=flash0.img conv=notrunc
$ dd if=/dev/zero of=flash1.img bs=1M count=64
Include the below line instead of "-bios QEMU_EFI.fd" in Qemu cmd line.
-pflash flash0.img -pflash flash1.img \
Thanks
>
> Thanks
> Neeraj
>
>> Thanks
>>
>>>
>>>> More test details: https://docs.qq.com/doc/DRXdKalFPTVlUbFN5
>>> And thank you for these details.
>>>
>>> Thanx, Paul
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists