| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <d9c75e7c-48e2-4398-a830-9d41e7a74cc3@efficios.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 08:25:52 -0400 From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rcu@...r.kernel.org, lkmm@...ts.linux.dev Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>, Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@...nel.org>, Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@...dia.com>, Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>, Zqiang <qiang.zhang@...ux.dev>, Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>, aeh@...a.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com, jhs@...atatu.com, kernel-team@...a.com, Erik Lundgren <elundgren@...a.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Introduce simple hazard pointers for lockdep On 2025-06-24 23:10, Boqun Feng wrote: > Hi, > > This is the official first version of simple hazard pointers following > the RFC: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250414060055.341516-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com/ > > I rebase it onto v6.16-rc3 and hope to get more feedback this time. > > Thanks a lot for Breno Leitao to try the RFC out and share the numbers. > > I did an extra comparison this time, between the shazptr solution and > the synchronize_rcu_expedited() solution. In my test, during a 100 times > "tc qdisc replace" run: > > * IPI rate with the shazptr solution: ~14 per second per core. > * IPI rate with synchronize_rcu_expedited(): ~140 per second per core. > > (IPI results were from the 'CAL' line in /proc/interrupt) > > This shows that while both solutions have the similar speedup, shazptr > solution avoids the introduce of high IPI rate compared to > synchronize_rcu_expedited(). > > Feedback is welcome and please let know if there is any concern or > suggestion. Thanks! Hi Boqun, What is unclear to me is what is the delta wrt: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241008135034.1982519-4-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com/ and whether this helper against compiler optimizations would still be needed here: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241008135034.1982519-2-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com/ Thanks, Mathieu > > Regards, > Boqun > > -------------------------------------- > Please find the old performance below: > > On my system (a 96-cpu VMs), the results of: > > time /usr/sbin/tc qdisc replace dev eth0 root handle 0x1: mq > > are (with lockdep enabled): > > (without the patchset) > real 0m1.039s > user 0m0.001s > sys 0m0.069s > > (with the patchset) > real 0m0.053s > user 0m0.000s > sys 0m0.051s > > i.e. almost 20x speed-up. > > Other comparisons between RCU and shazptr, the rcuscale results (using > default configuration from > tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/kvm.sh): > > RCU: > > Average grace-period duration: 7470.02 microseconds > Minimum grace-period duration: 3981.6 > 50th percentile grace-period duration: 6002.73 > 90th percentile grace-period duration: 7008.93 > 99th percentile grace-period duration: 10015 > Maximum grace-period duration: 142228 > > shazptr: > > Average grace-period duration: 0.845825 microseconds > Minimum grace-period duration: 0.199 > 50th percentile grace-period duration: 0.585 > 90th percentile grace-period duration: 1.656 > 99th percentile grace-period duration: 3.872 > Maximum grace-period duration: 3049.05 > > shazptr (skip_synchronize_self_scan=1, i.e. always let scan kthread to > wakeup): > > Average grace-period duration: 467.861 microseconds > Minimum grace-period duration: 92.913 > 50th percentile grace-period duration: 440.691 > 90th percentile grace-period duration: 460.623 > 99th percentile grace-period duration: 650.068 > Maximum grace-period duration: 5775.46 > > shazptr_wildcard (i.e. readers always use SHAZPTR_WILDCARD): > > Average grace-period duration: 599.569 microseconds > Minimum grace-period duration: 1.432 > 50th percentile grace-period duration: 582.631 > 90th percentile grace-period duration: 781.704 > 99th percentile grace-period duration: 1160.26 > Maximum grace-period duration: 6727.53 > > shazptr_wildcard (skip_synchronize_self_scan=1): > > Average grace-period duration: 460.466 microseconds > Minimum grace-period duration: 303.546 > 50th percentile grace-period duration: 424.334 > 90th percentile grace-period duration: 482.637 > 99th percentile grace-period duration: 600.214 > Maximum grace-period duration: 4126.94 > > Boqun Feng (8): > Introduce simple hazard pointers > shazptr: Add refscale test > shazptr: Add refscale test for wildcard > shazptr: Avoid synchronize_shaptr() busy waiting > shazptr: Allow skip self scan in synchronize_shaptr() > rcuscale: Allow rcu_scale_ops::get_gp_seq to be NULL > rcuscale: Add tests for simple hazard pointers > locking/lockdep: Use shazptr to protect the key hashlist > > include/linux/shazptr.h | 73 +++++++++ > kernel/locking/Makefile | 2 +- > kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 11 +- > kernel/locking/shazptr.c | 318 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > kernel/rcu/rcuscale.c | 60 +++++++- > kernel/rcu/refscale.c | 77 ++++++++++ > 6 files changed, 534 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 include/linux/shazptr.h > create mode 100644 kernel/locking/shazptr.c > -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. https://www.efficios.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists