From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] powerpc: remove address space overrides using set_fs()
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2020 11:02:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiDCcxuHgENo3UtdFi2QW9B7yXvNpG5CtF=A6bc6PTTgA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d78cb4be-48a9-a7c5-d9d1-d04d2a02b4c6@csgroup.eu>
On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 8:17 AM Christophe Leroy
<christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
>
>
> With this fix, I get
>
> root@vgoippro:~# time dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null count=1M
> 536870912 bytes (512.0MB) copied, 6.776327 seconds, 75.6MB/s
>
> That's still far from the 91.7MB/s I get with 5.9-rc2, but better than
> the 65.8MB/s I got yesterday with your series. Still some way to go thought.
I don't see why this change would make any difference.
And btw, why do the 32-bit and 64-bit checks even differ? It's not
like the extra (single) instruction should even matter. I think the
main reason is that the simpler 64-bit case could stay as a macro
(because it only uses "addr" and "size" once), but honestly, that
"simplification" doesn't help when you then need to have that #ifdef
for the 32-bit case and an inline function anyway.
So why isn't it just
static inline int __access_ok(unsigned long addr, unsigned long size)
{ return addr <= TASK_SIZE_MAX && size <= TASK_SIZE_MAX-addr; }
for both and be done with it?
The "size=0" check is only relevant for the "addr == TASK_SIZE_MAX"
case, and existed in the old code because it had that "-1" thing
becasue "seg.seg" was actually TASK_SIZE-1.
Now that we don't have any TASK_SIZE-1, zero isn't special any more.
However, I suspect a bigger reason for the actual performance
degradation would be the patch that makes things use "write_iter()"
for writing, even when a simpler "write()" exists.
For writing to /dev/null, the cost of setting up iterators and all the
pointless indirection is all kinds of stupid.
So I think "write()" should just go back to default to using
"->write()" rather than "->write_iter()" if the simpler case exists.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-02 18:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-27 15:00 remove the last set_fs() in common code, and remove it for x86 and powerpc v2 Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-27 15:00 ` [PATCH 01/10] fs: don't allow kernel reads and writes without iter ops Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-27 15:58 ` David Laight
2020-08-29 9:23 ` 'Christoph Hellwig'
[not found] ` <20200901064849.GI4299@shao2-debian>
2020-09-01 7:08 ` [fs] ef30fb3c60: kernel write not supported for file /sys/kernel/softlockup_panic Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-27 15:00 ` [PATCH 02/10] fs: don't allow splice read/write without explicit ops Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-27 15:00 ` [PATCH 03/10] uaccess: add infrastructure for kernel builds with set_fs() Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-27 15:00 ` [PATCH 04/10] test_bitmap: skip user bitmap tests for !CONFIG_SET_FS Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-27 15:00 ` [PATCH 05/10] lkdtm: disable set_fs-based " Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-27 18:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-08-29 9:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-09-01 18:52 ` Kees Cook
2020-09-01 18:57 ` Kees Cook
2020-09-02 8:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-27 15:00 ` [PATCH 06/10] x86: move PAGE_OFFSET, TASK_SIZE & friends to page_{32,64}_types.h Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-27 15:00 ` [PATCH 07/10] x86: make TASK_SIZE_MAX usable from assembly code Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-27 15:00 ` [PATCH 08/10] x86: remove address space overrides using set_fs() Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-27 18:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-08-29 9:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-27 15:00 ` [PATCH 09/10] powerpc: use non-set_fs based maccess routines Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-27 15:00 ` [PATCH 10/10] powerpc: remove address space overrides using set_fs() Christoph Hellwig
2020-09-02 6:15 ` Christophe Leroy
2020-09-02 12:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-09-02 13:13 ` David Laight
2020-09-02 13:24 ` Christophe Leroy
2020-09-02 13:51 ` David Laight
2020-09-02 14:12 ` Christophe Leroy
2020-09-02 15:02 ` David Laight
2020-09-02 15:17 ` Christophe Leroy
2020-09-02 18:02 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2020-09-03 7:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-09-03 7:27 ` Christophe Leroy
2020-09-03 8:55 ` Christophe Leroy
2020-09-03 7:20 ` Christophe Leroy
2020-08-27 15:31 ` remove the last set_fs() in common code, and remove it for x86 and powerpc v2 Christoph Hellwig
2020-09-01 17:13 ` Christophe Leroy
2020-09-01 17:25 ` Al Viro
2020-09-01 17:42 ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-09-01 18:39 ` Christophe Leroy
2020-09-01 19:01 ` Christophe Leroy
2020-09-02 8:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-27 9:29 ` [PATCH 02/10] fs: don't allow splice read/write without explicit ops David Howells
2020-10-27 9:51 ` David Howells
2020-10-27 9:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-27 10:38 ` David Howells
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAHk-=wiDCcxuHgENo3UtdFi2QW9B7yXvNpG5CtF=A6bc6PTTgA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).