linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v2 1/4] lib: test copy_{to,from}

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: <f4d24e8024e84ec5a20ab17b6c2d7f60@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Thu, 23 Mar 2023 22:16:12 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Mark Rutland' <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "agordeev@...ux.ibm.com" <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "aou@...s.berkeley.edu" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "gor@...ux.ibm.com" <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "hca@...ux.ibm.com" <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux@...linux.org.uk" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "palmer@...belt.com" <palmer@...belt.com>,
        "paul.walmsley@...ive.com" <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        "robin.murphy@....com" <robin.murphy@....com>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "viro@...iv.linux.org.uk" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        "will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/4] lib: test copy_{to,from}_user()

From: Mark Rutland
> Sent: 22 March 2023 14:05
....
> > IIUC, in such tests you only vary the destination offset. Our copy
> > routines in general try to align the source and leave the destination
> > unaligned for performance. It would be interesting to add some variation
> > on the source offset as well to spot potential issues with that part of
> > the memcpy routines.
> 
> I have that on my TODO list; I had intended to drop that into the
> usercopy_params. The only problem is that the cross product of size,
> src_offset, and dst_offset gets quite large.

I thought that is was better to align the writes and do misaligned reads.
Although maybe copy_to/from_user() would be best aligning the user address
(to avoid page faults part way through a misaligned access).

OTOH, on x86, is it even worth bothering at all.
I have measured a performance drop for misaligned reads, but it
was less than 1 clock per cache line in a test that was doing
2 misaligned reads in at least some of the clock cycles.
I think the memory read path can do two AVX reads each clock.
So doing two misaligned 64bit reads isn't stressing it.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)