linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] fs/file.c: add fast path in find_next

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: <1296ef8d-dade-46e5-8571-e7dba158f405@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 16:32:01 +0800
From: "Ma, Yu" <yu.ma@...el.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>
Cc: viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
 linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 pan.deng@...el.com, tianyou.li@...el.com, tim.c.chen@...el.com,
 tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com, yu.ma@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] fs/file.c: add fast path in find_next_fd()


On 7/5/2024 3:56 PM, Ma, Yu wrote:
> I had something like this in mind:
>>> diff --git a/fs/file.c b/fs/file.c
>>> index a3b72aa64f11..4d3307e39db7 100644
>>> --- a/fs/file.c
>>> +++ b/fs/file.c
>>> @@ -489,6 +489,16 @@ static unsigned int find_next_fd(struct fdtable
>>> *fdt, unsigned int start)
>>>          unsigned int maxfd = fdt->max_fds; /* always multiple of
>>> BITS_PER_LONG */
>>>          unsigned int maxbit = maxfd / BITS_PER_LONG;
>>>          unsigned int bitbit = start / BITS_PER_LONG;
>>> +       unsigned int bit;
>>> +
>>> +       /*
>>> +        * Try to avoid looking at the second level map.
>>> +        */
>>> +       bit = find_next_zero_bit(&fdt->open_fds[bitbit], BITS_PER_LONG,
>>> +                               start & (BITS_PER_LONG - 1));
>>> +       if (bit < BITS_PER_LONG) {
>>> +               return bit + bitbit * BITS_PER_LONG;
>>> +       }
>> Drat, you're right. I missed that Ma did not add the proper offset to
>> open_fds. *This* is what I meant :)
>>
>>                                 Honza
>
> Just tried this on v6.10-rc6, the improvement on top of patch 1 and 
> patch 2 is 7% for read and 3% for write, less than just check first word.
>
> Per my understanding, its performance would be better if we can find 
> free bit in the same word of next_fd with high possibility, but 
> next_fd just represents the lowest possible free bit. If fds are 
> open/close frequently and randomly, that might not always be the case, 
> next_fd may be distributed randomly, for example, 0-65 are occupied, 
> fd=3 is returned, next_fd will be set to 3, next time when 3 is 
> allocated, next_fd will be set to 4, while the actual first free bit 
> is 66 , when 66 is allocated, and fd=5 is returned, then the above 
> process would be went through again.
>
> Yu
>
Hi Guzik, Honza,

Do we have any more comment or idea regarding to the fast path? Thanks 
for your time and any feedback :)


Regards

Yu