linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] arm64: support batched/deferred tlb shootdown during page reclamation

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]

Message-ID: <41b48f0a-c001-9a8c-3017-4b2e06b44e34@arm.com>
Date:   Wed, 21 Sep 2022 09:03:23 +0530
From:   Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>
To:     Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>
Cc:     Yicong Yang <yangyicong@...wei.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        x86@...nel.org, catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, corbet@....net, peterz@...radead.org,
        arnd@...db.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        darren@...amperecomputing.com, yangyicong@...ilicon.com,
        huzhanyuan@...o.com, lipeifeng@...o.com, zhangshiming@...o.com,
        guojian@...o.com, realmz6@...il.com, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
        openrisc@...ts.librecores.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com, xhao@...ux.alibaba.com,
        prime.zeng@...ilicon.com, Barry Song <v-songbaohua@...o.com>,
        Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] arm64: support batched/deferred tlb shootdown
 during page reclamation



On 9/21/22 07:21, Barry Song wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 1:50 PM Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 8:45 PM Anshuman Khandual
>> <anshuman.khandual@....com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/20/22 09:09, Barry Song wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 3:00 PM Anshuman Khandual
>>>> <anshuman.khandual@....com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/22/22 13:51, Yicong Yang wrote:
>>>>>> +static inline bool arch_tlbbatch_should_defer(struct mm_struct *mm)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> +     return true;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>
>>>>> This needs to be conditional on systems, where there will be performance
>>>>> improvements, and should not just be enabled all the time on all systems.
>>>>> num_online_cpus() > X, which does not hold any cpu hotplug lock would be
>>>>> a good metric ?
>>>>
>>>> for a small system, i don't see how this patch will help, e.g. cpus <= 4;
>>>> so we can actually disable tlb-batch on small systems.
>>>
>>> Do not subscribe ARCH_WANT_BATCHED_UNMAP_TLB_FLUSH based on NR_CPUS ?
>>> That might not help much as the default value is 256 for NR_CPUS.
>>>
>>> OR
>>>
>>> arch_tlbbatch_should_defer() checks on
>>>
>>> 1. online cpus                  (dont enable batched TLB if <= X)
>>> 2. ARM64_WORKAROUND_REPEAT_TLBI (dont enable batched TLB)
>>>
>>>> just need to check if we will have any race condition since hotplug will
>>>> make the condition true and false dynamically.
>>>
>>> If should_defer_flush() evaluate to be false, then ptep_clear_flush()
>>> clears and flushes the entry right away. This should not race with other
>>> queued up TLBI requests, which will be flushed separately. Wondering how
>>> there can be a race here !
>>
>> Right. How about we make something as below?
>>
>> static inline bool arch_tlbbatch_should_defer(struct mm_struct *mm)
>> {
>>     /* for a small system very small number of CPUs, TLB shootdown is cheap */
>>     if (num_online_cpus() <= 4 ||
>> unlikely(this_cpu_has_cap(ARM64_WORKAROUND_REPEAT_TLBI)))
>>           return false;
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_WORKAROUND_REPEAT_TLBI
>>     if (unlikely(this_cpu_has_cap(ARM64_WORKAROUND_REPEAT_TLBI)))
>>          return false;
>> #endif
>>
>>     return true;
>> }
> 
> sorry, i mean
> 
> static inline bool arch_tlbbatch_should_defer(struct mm_struct *mm)
> {
>     /* for a small system very small number of CPUs, TLB shootdown is cheap */
>     if (num_online_cpus() <= 4)
>             return false;
> 
> #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_WORKAROUND_REPEAT_TLBI
>     if (unlikely(this_cpu_has_cap(ARM64_WORKAROUND_REPEAT_TLBI)))
>             return false;
> #endif
> 
>     return true;
> }

This is a good starting point.