linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] x86/bugs: Only harden syscalls when needed

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 13:21:32 +0800
From: Yujie Liu <yujie.liu@...el.com>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
CC: <x86@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linus Torvalds
	<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Daniel Sneddon
	<daniel.sneddon@...ux.intel.com>, Pawan Gupta
	<pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
	<konrad.wilk@...cle.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, "Greg
 Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Sean Christopherson
	<seanjc@...gle.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>, Dave Hansen
	<dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@...e.com>, "KP
 Singh" <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, "Borislav
 Petkov" <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] x86/bugs: Only harden syscalls when needed

On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 10:17:41PM -0700, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 04:09:33PM +0800, Yujie Liu wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 02:09:47PM -0700, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > Syscall hardening (converting the syscall indirect branch to a series of
> > > direct branches) has shown some performance regressions:
> > >
> > > - Red Hat internal testing showed up to 12% slowdowns in database
> > >   benchmark testing on Sapphire Rapids when the DB was stressed with 80+
> > >   users to cause contention.
> > >
> > > - The kernel test robot's will-it-scale benchmarks showed significant
> > >   regressions on Skylake with IBRS:
> > >   https://lkml.kernel.org/lkml/202404191333.178a0eed-yujie.liu@intel.com
> > 
> > To clarify, we reported a +1.4% improvement (not regression) of
> > will-it-scale futex4 benchmark on Skylake. Meanwhile we did observe some
> > regressions by running other benchmarks on Ice Lake, such as:
> > 
> >     stress-ng.null.ops_per_sec -4.0% regression on Intel Xeon Gold 6346 (Ice Lake)
> >     unixbench.fsbuffer.throughput -1.4% regression on Intel Xeon Gold 6346 (Ice Lake)
> 
> Thanks for clarifying that.  I'm not sure what I was looking at.
> 
> I also saw your email where Ice Lake showed a ~10% regression for
> 1e3ad78334a6.  Unfortunately my patch wouldn't help with that, as it's
> designed to help with older systems (e.g., Skylake) and newer (e.g.,
> Sapphire Rapids) but not Ice/Cascade Lake.
> 
> Whether 1e3ad78334a6 helps or hurts seems very workload-dependent.
> 
> It would be especially interesting to see if my patch helps on the newer
> systems which have the HW mitigation: Raptor Lake, Meteor Lake, Sapphire
> Rapids, Emerald Rapids.
> 
> For now, maybe I'll just table this patch until we have more data.

FYI, we tested this patch on a Sapphire Rapids machine in our test
infrastructure. There are both improvements and regressions across
different benchmarks, which does show that the impact may be very
workload-dependent.

Intel Xeon Platinum 8480CTDX (Sapphire Rapids) with 512G Memory:

+-----------------------+----------+---------------+------------------+
|                       | mainline |  + this patch | (percent change) |
+-----------------------+----------+---------------+------------------+
| will-it-scale.futex4  | 5015892  | 5118744       | +2.05%           |
+-----------------------+----------+---------------+------------------+
| will-it-scale.pread1  | 2720498  | 2721206       | +0.03%           |
+-----------------------+----------+---------------+------------------+
| will-it-scale.pwrite1 | 2143302  | 2164511       | +0.99%           |
+-----------------------+----------+---------------+------------------+
| will-it-scale.poll1   | 4046943  | 4095046       | +1.19%           |
+-----------------------+----------+---------------+------------------+
| stress-ng.null        | 19400    | 18689         | -3.66%           |
+-----------------------+----------+---------------+------------------+
| unixbench.fsbuffer    | 369494   | 364181        | -1.44%           |
+-----------------------+----------+---------------+------------------+

Thanks,
Yujie