[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CABCJKudz5O5_-1q1H0o2DFRcnpMQDBPv4STUVa2bOE9ePaeyDA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 09:16:53 -0700
From: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
To: Haibo Li <haibo.li@...iatek.com>
Cc: xiaoming.yu@...iatek.com, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
André Almeida <andrealmeid@...lia.com>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>,
Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...hat.com>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC..."
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ANDROID: cfi: free old cfi shadow asynchronously
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 2:47 AM Haibo Li <haibo.li@...iatek.com> wrote:
>
> Currenly, it uses synchronize_rcu() to wait old rcu reader to go away
> in update_shadow.In embedded platform like ARM CA7X,
> load_module blocks 40~50ms in update_shadow.
> When there are more than one hundred kernel modules,
> it blocks several seconds.
>
> To accelerate load_module,change synchronize_rcu to call_rcu.
>
> Signed-off-by: Haibo Li <haibo.li@...iatek.com>
> Signed-off-by: Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@...iatek.com>
Thanks for the patch! Please drop ANDROID: from the subject line,
that's only used in the Android kernel trees.
> kernel/cfi.c | 12 ++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/cfi.c b/kernel/cfi.c
> index 456771c8e454..a4836d59ca27 100644
> --- a/kernel/cfi.c
> +++ b/kernel/cfi.c
> @@ -43,6 +43,8 @@ typedef u16 shadow_t;
> struct cfi_shadow {
> /* Page index for the beginning of the shadow */
> unsigned long base;
> + /* rcu to free old cfi_shadow asynchronously */
> + struct rcu_head rcu;
> /* An array of __cfi_check locations (as indices to the shadow) */
> shadow_t shadow[1];
> } __packed;
> @@ -182,6 +184,13 @@ static void remove_module_from_shadow(struct cfi_shadow *s, struct module *mod,
> }
> }
>
> +static void _cfi_shadow_free_rcu(struct rcu_head *rcu)
I think this can be simply renamed to free_shadow.
> +{
> + struct cfi_shadow *old = container_of(rcu, struct cfi_shadow, rcu);
> +
> + vfree(old);
> +}
> +
> typedef void (*update_shadow_fn)(struct cfi_shadow *, struct module *,
> unsigned long min_addr, unsigned long max_addr);
>
> @@ -211,11 +220,10 @@ static void update_shadow(struct module *mod, unsigned long base_addr,
>
> rcu_assign_pointer(cfi_shadow, next);
> mutex_unlock(&shadow_update_lock);
> - synchronize_rcu();
>
> if (prev) {
> set_memory_rw((unsigned long)prev, SHADOW_PAGES);
> - vfree(prev);
> + call_rcu(&prev->rcu, _cfi_shadow_free_rcu);
> }
> }
It's probably better to keep the pages read-only until they're
actually released. Can you move the set_memory_rw call to the new
function?
Sami
Powered by blists - more mailing lists