netdev - Re: XDP performance regression due to CONFIG

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:   Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:02:50 +0200
From:   Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
To:     David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Tushar Dave <tushar.n.dave@...cle.com>,
        "xdp-newbies@...r.kernel.org" <xdp-newbies@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        William Tu <u9012063@...il.com>,
        Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>,
        "Karlsson, Magnus" <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
        brouer@...hat.com
Subject: Re: XDP performance regression due to CONFIG_RETPOLINE Spectre V2

On Sat, 14 Apr 2018 21:29:26 +0200
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 2018-04-13 at 19:26 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 10:12:41AM -0700, Tushar Dave wrote:  
> > > I guess there is nothing we need to do!
> > >
> > > On x86, in case of no intel iommu or iommu is disabled, you end up in
> > > swiotlb for DMA API calls when system has 4G memory.
> > > However, AFAICT, for 64bit DMA capable devices swiotlb DMA APIs do not
> > > use bounce buffer until and unless you have swiotlb=force specified in
> > > kernel commandline.  
> > 
> > Sure.  But that means very sync_*_to_device and sync_*_to_cpu now
> > involves an indirect call to do exactly nothing, which in the workload
> > Jesper is looking at is causing a huge performance degradation due to
> > retpolines.  

Yes, exactly.

> 
> We should look at using the
> 
>  if (dma_ops == swiotlb_dma_ops)
>     swiotlb_map_page()
>  else
>     dma_ops->map_page()
> 
> trick for this. Perhaps with alternatives so that when an Intel or AMD
> IOMMU is detected, it's *that* which is checked for as the special
> case.

Yes, this trick is basically what I'm asking for :-)

It did sound like Hellwig wanted to first avoid/fix that x86 end-up
defaulting to swiotlb.  Thus, we just have to do the same trick with
the new default fall-through dma_ops.

-- 
Best regards,
  Jesper Dangaard Brouer
  MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
  LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer