linux-kernel - [PATCH] crypto: hisilicon/zip - Optimize performance by replacing rw

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20240823183856.561166-1-visitorckw@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2024 02:38:56 +0800
From: Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@...il.com>
To: shenyang39@...wei.com,
	wangzhou1@...ilicon.com
Cc: herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
	davem@...emloft.net,
	jserv@...s.ncku.edu.tw,
	linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH] crypto: hisilicon/zip - Optimize performance by replacing rw_lock with spinlock

The req_lock is currently implemented as a rw_lock, but there are no
instances where read_lock() is called. This means that the lock is
effectively only used by writers, making it functionally equivalent to
a simple spinlock.

As stated in Documentation/locking/spinlocks.rst:
"Reader-writer locks require more atomic memory operations than simple
spinlocks. Unless the reader critical section is long, you are better
off just using spinlocks."

Since the rw_lock in this case incurs additional atomic memory
operations without any benefit from reader-writer locking, it is more
efficient to replace it with a spinlock. This patch implements that
replacement to optimize the driver's performance.

Signed-off-by: Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@...il.com>
---
Note: Build test only.

 drivers/crypto/hisilicon/zip/zip_crypto.c | 14 +++++++-------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/crypto/hisilicon/zip/zip_crypto.c b/drivers/crypto/hisilicon/zip/zip_crypto.c
index 94e2d66b04b6..92d3bd0dfe1b 100644
--- a/drivers/crypto/hisilicon/zip/zip_crypto.c
+++ b/drivers/crypto/hisilicon/zip/zip_crypto.c
@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ struct hisi_zip_req {
 struct hisi_zip_req_q {
 	struct hisi_zip_req *q;
 	unsigned long *req_bitmap;
-	rwlock_t req_lock;
+	spinlock_t req_lock;
 	u16 size;
 };
 
@@ -116,17 +116,17 @@ static struct hisi_zip_req *hisi_zip_create_req(struct hisi_zip_qp_ctx *qp_ctx,
 	struct hisi_zip_req *req_cache;
 	int req_id;
 
-	write_lock(&req_q->req_lock);
+	spin_lock(&req_q->req_lock);
 
 	req_id = find_first_zero_bit(req_q->req_bitmap, req_q->size);
 	if (req_id >= req_q->size) {
-		write_unlock(&req_q->req_lock);
+		spin_unlock(&req_q->req_lock);
 		dev_dbg(&qp_ctx->qp->qm->pdev->dev, "req cache is full!\n");
 		return ERR_PTR(-EAGAIN);
 	}
 	set_bit(req_id, req_q->req_bitmap);
 
-	write_unlock(&req_q->req_lock);
+	spin_unlock(&req_q->req_lock);
 
 	req_cache = q + req_id;
 	req_cache->req_id = req_id;
@@ -140,9 +140,9 @@ static void hisi_zip_remove_req(struct hisi_zip_qp_ctx *qp_ctx,
 {
 	struct hisi_zip_req_q *req_q = &qp_ctx->req_q;
 
-	write_lock(&req_q->req_lock);
+	spin_lock(&req_q->req_lock);
 	clear_bit(req->req_id, req_q->req_bitmap);
-	write_unlock(&req_q->req_lock);
+	spin_unlock(&req_q->req_lock);
 }
 
 static void hisi_zip_fill_addr(struct hisi_zip_sqe *sqe, struct hisi_zip_req *req)
@@ -456,7 +456,7 @@ static int hisi_zip_create_req_q(struct hisi_zip_ctx *ctx)
 
 			goto err_free_comp_q;
 		}
-		rwlock_init(&req_q->req_lock);
+		spin_lock_init(&req_q->req_lock);
 
 		req_q->q = kcalloc(req_q->size, sizeof(struct hisi_zip_req),
 				   GFP_KERNEL);
-- 
2.34.1