linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] bpf: Allocate bpf_event

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]

Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 10:23:10 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, 
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, 
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, 
	Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, 
	KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, 
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Aleksei Shchekotikhin <alekseis@...gle.com>, Nilay Vaish <nilayvaish@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] bpf: Allocate bpf_event_entry with node info

On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 9:54 AM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Jiri,
>
> On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 1:31 AM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 11:53:11PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > > It was reported that accessing perf_event map entry caused pretty high
> > > LLC misses in get_map_perf_counter().  As reading perf_event is allowed
> > > for the local CPU only, I think we can use the target CPU of the event
> > > as hint for the allocation like in perf_event_alloc() so that the event
> > > and the entry can be in the same node at least.
> >
> > looks good, is there any profile to prove the gain?
>
> No, at this point.  I'm not sure if it'd help LLC hit ratio but
> I think it should improve the memory latency.

I have the same concern as Jiri.
Without numbers this is just a code churn.
Does this patch really make a difference?
Without numbers maintainers would have to believe the "just trust me" part.
So..
pw-bot: cr