From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
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: Thu, 3 Sep 2020 09:11:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200903071144.GA19247@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wiDCcxuHgENo3UtdFi2QW9B7yXvNpG5CtF=A6bc6PTTgA@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 11:02:22AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I don't see why this change would make any difference.
Me neither, but while looking at a different project I did spot places
that actually do an access_ok with len 0, that's why I wanted him to
try.
That being said: Christophe are these number stables? Do you get
similar numbers with multiple runs?
> 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.
I'll have to leave that to the powerpc folks. The intent was to not
change the behavior (and I even fucked that up for the the size == 0
case).
> 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.
Except that we do not actually have such a patch. For normal user
writes we only use ->write_iter if ->write is not present. But what
shows up in the profile is that /dev/zero only has a read_iter op and
not a normal read. I've added a patch below that implements a normal
read which might help a tad with this workload, but should not be part
of a regression.
Also Christophe: can you bisect which patch starts this? Is it really
this last patch in the series?
---
diff --git a/drivers/char/mem.c b/drivers/char/mem.c
index abd4ffdc8cdebc..1dc99ab158457a 100644
--- a/drivers/char/mem.c
+++ b/drivers/char/mem.c
@@ -726,6 +726,27 @@ static ssize_t read_iter_zero(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *iter)
return written;
}
+static ssize_t read_zero(struct file *file, char __user *buf,
+ size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
+{
+ size_t cleared = 0;
+
+ while (count) {
+ size_t chunk = min_t(size_t, count, PAGE_SIZE);
+
+ if (clear_user(buf + cleared, chunk))
+ return cleared ? cleared : -EFAULT;
+ cleared += chunk;
+ count -= chunk;
+
+ if (signal_pending(current))
+ return cleared ? cleared : -ERESTARTSYS;
+ cond_resched();
+ }
+
+ return cleared;
+}
+
static int mmap_zero(struct file *file, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
{
#ifndef CONFIG_MMU
@@ -921,6 +942,7 @@ static const struct file_operations zero_fops = {
.llseek = zero_lseek,
.write = write_zero,
.read_iter = read_iter_zero,
+ .read = read_zero,
.write_iter = write_iter_zero,
.mmap = mmap_zero,
.get_unmapped_area = get_unmapped_area_zero,
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-03 7:11 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
2020-09-03 7:11 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
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=20200903071144.GA19247@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--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=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--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).