linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Optimize mprotect for large folios

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: <6ac365cf-da48-4791-b56d-62335519efdf@lucifer.local>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 12:03:31 +0100
From: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
To: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, ryan.roberts@....com, david@...hat.com,
        willy@...radead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com,
        vbabka@...e.cz, jannh@...gle.com, anshuman.khandual@....com,
        peterx@...hat.com, joey.gouly@....com, ioworker0@...il.com,
        baohua@...nel.org, kevin.brodsky@....com, quic_zhenhuah@...cinc.com,
        christophe.leroy@...roup.eu, yangyicong@...ilicon.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, hughd@...gle.com,
        yang@...amperecomputing.com, ziy@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Optimize mprotect for large folios

-cc namit@...are.com

Also,

On future respins can we please drop Namit from vmware from cc list?

I am being spammed with these messages whenever I reply here:

'A custom mail flow rule created by an admin at onevmw.onmicrosoft.com has
blocked your message.  Recipient is not authorized to accept external mail'

Or ask him to fix this :)

Cheers, Lorenzo

On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 10:53:29AM +0530, Dev Jain wrote:
> This patchset optimizes the mprotect() system call for large folios
> by PTE-batching.
>
> We use the following test cases to measure performance, mprotect()'ing
> the mapped memory to read-only then read-write 40 times:
>
> Test case 1: Mapping 1G of memory, touching it to get PMD-THPs, then
> pte-mapping those THPs
> Test case 2: Mapping 1G of memory with 64K mTHPs
> Test case 3: Mapping 1G of memory with 4K pages
>
> Average execution time on arm64, Apple M3:
> Before the patchset:
> T1: 7.9 seconds   T2: 7.9 seconds   T3: 4.2 seconds
>
> After the patchset:
> T1: 2.1 seconds   T2: 2.2 seconds   T3: 4.2 seconds
>
> Observing T1/T2 and T3 before the patchset, we also remove the regression
> introduced by ptep_get() on a contpte block. And, for large folios we get
> an almost 74% performance improvement.
>
> v1->v2:
>  - Rebase onto mm-unstable (6ebffe676fcf: util_macros.h: make the header more resilient)
>  - Abridge the anon-exclusive condition (Lance Yang)
>
> Dev Jain (7):
>   mm: Refactor code in mprotect
>   mm: Optimize mprotect() by batch-skipping PTEs
>   mm: Add batched versions of ptep_modify_prot_start/commit
>   arm64: Add batched version of ptep_modify_prot_start
>   arm64: Add batched version of ptep_modify_prot_commit
>   mm: Batch around can_change_pte_writable()
>   mm: Optimize mprotect() through PTE-batching
>
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h |  10 ++
>  arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c              |  21 +++-
>  include/linux/mm.h               |   4 +-
>  include/linux/pgtable.h          |  42 ++++++++
>  mm/gup.c                         |   2 +-
>  mm/huge_memory.c                 |   4 +-
>  mm/memory.c                      |   6 +-
>  mm/mprotect.c                    | 165 ++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>  mm/pgtable-generic.c             |  16 ++-
>  9 files changed, 198 insertions(+), 72 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.30.2
>