From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F122DC04AB4 for ; Fri, 17 May 2019 16:13:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6A012087E for ; Fri, 17 May 2019 16:13:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="dxB5PWDK" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A6A012087E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 3A7376B0006; Fri, 17 May 2019 12:13:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 356796B0008; Fri, 17 May 2019 12:13:19 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 21D6D6B000A; Fri, 17 May 2019 12:13:19 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from mail-pg1-f200.google.com (mail-pg1-f200.google.com [209.85.215.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB94C6B0006 for ; Fri, 17 May 2019 12:13:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pg1-f200.google.com with SMTP id 14so4698377pgo.14 for ; Fri, 17 May 2019 09:13:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:dkim-signature:date:from:to:cc:subject :message-id:references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=m02iPOvo556PAupUnS9qzquFGaL67NVm3EjfgL2dy5A=; b=R0Gj64vNlBhAZhLhQCF0XDrpvkTc0Ojw7FYo0T0qBQ/h2WOGUj78sVHelxfxylhetB tH2kNRj9ngggsQcHjqORlqgpkFUUsT1v8tzceGuUIIXh4nP0zmcYFcKTAI9+zahY++C1 1rzSGr+zmJl4O8ykuWSshz7w9xlaczsbLWXKiL9z/vVZwpMaGdCU/TDLes9dEiUobVAg 1LXApYdN0RGWkxph3hkL3BDJI36+N06mApqMwlJdrZM6DyUfgyvZ4OS5vvKBXVypZ9sA aV6XvnVDQmZJ5VF1E5ScEBDQx/jZ0mBFFM00VMu5PNh3fWvmeCBtHp/INFTXlY8PIDHX UbSQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUhrS1rYlOMUVRQTQKlHEJ0DkDXt/03YhvDnFlQyY6yer1eDfFz sf7Jg6UnJLdUVb/S73cytUguNW/gMoEYP6JI9EBoIhSqLnw0TA7BbwunTy3XlTznXBqVERZAzgU EWFGvDEZieDjCMIZBe15tVlPoqTajoQWuPGI8FKo42Xklmg1XCPBDlcNA32cGC7iGrA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:2beb:: with SMTP id l98mr55869493plb.290.1558109598449; Fri, 17 May 2019 09:13:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:2beb:: with SMTP id l98mr55869411plb.290.1558109597423; Fri, 17 May 2019 09:13:17 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1558109597; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=XsGmPwF6gmGkClHK3yzX+lZTuut09XMjwBxOTf2+lRdGkFomtda6pp3jLuz0fYqi66 m0VvFn9ReAjAf+a6LBfEv9pgQVBkBsOTfWeEigww1erCdD0Trf5MWgD4tMsiwl3G/jIt yHe0LNvrK7L/P3aZGP/I5H1BVkde7Qjg1OfqDyGwxwOjam6uOL4rlcIcXqiacNW01aAJ S1mdSRkGrdvuS2qGEcR8KTUzUtBWHzO9KNgs5fe02HSZ68sqlwzJFk+wAnM4cVqMSAPK NuKPetaubHaVPHYLTkC/IX7Zv4G2MSmcm/US+sYV7L8djxPD8kAHKWGxFLB050CnWAPS HxTw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=m02iPOvo556PAupUnS9qzquFGaL67NVm3EjfgL2dy5A=; b=FKz9geO5RLF+i03cnAIdfZhnkA+HwofhG+PcSVfcdRSk6dzOnLgGxyKooz03QqmUc+ slSdTgjq4tF+nxABzUKe/P3dbmpHnQPb3cUJK4CvU47uGXGmbfwWb3/nsOeLOxxcTDbK C+ruciv3q+EwhutCn7MXCNxtypKy93LtfknLdqmIutDwFu6X6rcjrmtNfo9zHJShXzF3 o2SzyUYSH05HLV2geC4IVQZKmcZaOK0NXuVUWHAHTwpcKgE0cQ0VgPIy9YJBGcUjacw9 3jv0HxnvzqSVAuYYfrqB2HfV9ZlsjP/0+UMXjXpTWUWjh4+/+Rd33l0y1ccgA6NHiOzo 27NQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@chromium.org header.s=google header.b=dxB5PWDK; spf=pass (google.com: domain of keescook@chromium.org designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=keescook@chromium.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=chromium.org Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id ce5sor10044309plb.17.2019.05.17.09.13.17 for (Google Transport Security); Fri, 17 May 2019 09:13:17 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of keescook@chromium.org designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.220.65; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@chromium.org header.s=google header.b=dxB5PWDK; spf=pass (google.com: domain of keescook@chromium.org designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=keescook@chromium.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=chromium.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=m02iPOvo556PAupUnS9qzquFGaL67NVm3EjfgL2dy5A=; b=dxB5PWDK5Ubq2UYGrAtUPASDCX1nBouaHJnYPPCDht/KwMlctyK5LwRI6KbDJjVvbI HqXHsPePvPX1QWUDr1d9ekMHs0Zj5byZfC4wEAdxVtQcEXr/Wtj5v6/zHjqcimjzICBF Yvt8t2d/Y9dZzZnkJh8xnV/qjGuh6UppseOIg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzxdYYkC4Vm6qLkhkpXpaHS6hS+/bNgbbir5gqCgNKRQ20zMhl2VQQoGk52iRa1FhEBt45aSg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8214:: with SMTP id x20mr35601151pln.308.1558109597070; Fri, 17 May 2019 09:13:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 37sm13381620pgn.21.2019.05.17.09.13.15 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 17 May 2019 09:13:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 09:13:14 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Alexander Potapenko Cc: Andrew Morton , Christoph Lameter , Kernel Hardening , Masahiro Yamada , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Nick Desaulniers , Kostya Serebryany , Dmitry Vyukov , Sandeep Patil , Laura Abbott , Randy Dunlap , Jann Horn , Mark Rutland , Linux Memory Management List , linux-security-module Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] net: apply __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT to AF_UNIX sk_buff allocations Message-ID: <201905170900.BFA80ED@keescook> References: <20190514143537.10435-1-glider@google.com> <20190514143537.10435-5-glider@google.com> <201905160923.BD3E530EFC@keescook> <201905161714.A53D472D9@keescook> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 10:49:03AM +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote: > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 2:26 AM Kees Cook wrote: > > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 09:53:01AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > > On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 04:35:37PM +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote: > > > > Add sock_alloc_send_pskb_noinit(), which is similar to > > > > sock_alloc_send_pskb(), but allocates with __GFP_NO_AUTOINIT. > > > > This helps reduce the slowdown on hackbench in the init_on_alloc mode > > > > from 6.84% to 3.45%. > > > > > > Out of curiosity, why the creation of the new function over adding a > > > gfp flag argument to sock_alloc_send_pskb() and updating callers? (There > > > are only 6 callers, and this change already updates 2 of those.) > > > > > > > Slowdown for the initialization features compared to init_on_free=0, > > > > init_on_alloc=0: > > > > > > > > hackbench, init_on_free=1: +7.71% sys time (st.err 0.45%) > > > > hackbench, init_on_alloc=1: +3.45% sys time (st.err 0.86%) > > > > So I've run some of my own wall-clock timings of kernel builds (which > > should be an pretty big "worst case" situation, and I see much smaller > > performance changes: > How many cores were you using? I suspect the numbers may vary a bit > depending on that. I was using 4. > > init_on_alloc=1 > > Run times: 289.72 286.95 287.87 287.34 287.35 > > Min: 286.95 Max: 289.72 Mean: 287.85 Std Dev: 0.98 > > 0.25% faster (within the std dev noise) > > > > init_on_free=1 > > Run times: 303.26 301.44 301.19 301.55 301.39 > > Min: 301.19 Max: 303.26 Mean: 301.77 Std Dev: 0.75 > > 4.57% slower > > > > init_on_free=1 with the PAX_MEMORY_SANITIZE slabs excluded: > > Run times: 299.19 299.85 298.95 298.23 298.64 > > Min: 298.23 Max: 299.85 Mean: 298.97 Std Dev: 0.55 > > 3.60% slower > > > > So the tuning certainly improved things by 1%. My perf numbers don't > > show the 24% hit you were seeing at all, though. > Note that 24% is the _sys_ time slowdown. The wall time slowdown seen > in this case was 8.34% Ah! Gotcha. Yeah, seems the impact for init_on_free is pretty variable. The init_on_alloc appears close to free, though. -- Kees Cook