linux-kernel - RE: [RFC PATCH v2] iov_iter: Convert iterate*() to inline funcs

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: <a72036d57d50464ea4fe7fa556ee1a72@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Aug 2023 10:17:23 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'David Howells' <dhowells@...hat.com>
CC:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        "jlayton@...nel.org" <jlayton@...nel.org>,
        "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v2] iov_iter: Convert iterate*() to inline funcs

From: David Howells
> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 10:50 AM
> 
> David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM> wrote:
> 
> > It is harder to compare because of some of the random name changes.
> 
> I wouldn't say 'random' exactly, but if you prefer, some of the name changing
> can be split out into a separate patch.  The macros are kind of the worst
> since they picked up variable names from the callers.
> 
> > The version of the source I found seems to pass priv2 to functions
> > that don't use it?
> 
> That can't be avoided if I convert everything to inline functions and function
> pointers - but the optimiser can get rid of it where it can inline the step
> function.

AFAICT the IOVEC one was only called directly.

> I tried passing the iterator to the step functions instead, but that just made
> things bigger.  memcpy_from_iter_mc() is interesting to deal with.  I would
> prefer to deal with it in the caller so we only do the check once, but that
> might mean duplicating the caller.

You could try something slightly horrid that the compiler
might optimise for you.
Instead of passing in a function pointer pass a number.
Then do something like:
#define call_iter(id, ...) \
	(id == x ? fn_x(__VA_ARGS__) : id == y ? fn_y(__VA_ARGS) ...)
constant folding on the inline should kill the function pointer.
You might get away with putting the args on the end.

...
> > I rather hope the should_fail_usercopy() and instrument_copy_xxx()
> > calls are usually either absent or, at most, nops.
> 
> Okay - it's probably worth marking those too, then.

Thinking I'm sure they are KASAN annotations.
The are few enough calls that I suspect that replicating them
won't affect KASAN (etc) builds.

> > This all seems to have a lot fewer options than last time I looked.
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by 'a lot fewer options'?

It might just be ITER_PIPE that has gone.

> > Is it worth optimising the KVEC case with a single buffer?
> 
> You mean an equivalent of UBUF?  Maybe.  There are probably a whole bunch of
> netfs places that do single-kvec writes, though I'm trying to convert these
> over to bvec arrays, combining them with their data, and MSG_SPLICE_PAGES.

I'm thinking of what happens with kernel callers of things
like the socket code - especially for address/option buffers.
Probably io_uring and bpf (and my out of tree drivers!).

Could be the equivalent of UBUF, but checking for KVEC with
a count of 1 wouldn't really add any more cmp/jmp pairs.

I've also noticed in the past that some of this code seems
to be optimised for zero length buffers/fragments.
Surely they just need to work?

	David

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