Linux-MIPS Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
	"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
	<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
	Paul Burton <paul.burton@mips.com>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@android.com>,
	Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
	Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@gmail.com>,
	Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
	Huw Davies <huw@codeweavers.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/19] Unify vDSOs across more architectures
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 13:04:58 +0100
Message-ID: <d96667d5-e43b-d33a-fbd0-5acfb4904316@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a11DE0sXteZoaP_N=mDhx3tXitGKddn1ogtFqJBYO-SCA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Arnd,

thank you for your review.

On 31/05/2019 09:46, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 4:15 PM Vincenzo Frascino
> <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> vDSO (virtual dynamic shared object) is a mechanism that the Linux
>> kernel provides as an alternative to system calls to reduce where
>> possible the costs in terms of cycles.
>> This is possible because certain syscalls like gettimeofday() do
>> not write any data and return one or more values that are stored
>> in the kernel, which makes relatively safe calling them directly
>> as a library function.
> 
> Hi Vincento,
> 
> I've very happy with how this turned out overall, and as far as I can
> tell you have addressed all my previous comments. I had another
> look through the series and only noticed a few very minor issues.
> 

Thanks! I agree with what you pointed out in the single patches, I will wait for
Thomas to review them as well and then will address all the comments in v7.

...

> 
> One open question I touched in my review is whether we want to
> have a vdso version of clock_getres() in all architectures or not.
> I'd prefer to leave it out because there is very little advantage to
> it over the system call (the results don't change at runtime and
> can easily be cached by libc if performance ever matters), and
> it takes up a small amount of memory for the implementation.
> 

I thought about it and I ended up with what proposed in this patchset mainly for
symmetry across all the architectures since in the end they use the same common
code.

It seems also that there is some performance impact (i.e.):

clock-getres-monotonic:    libc(system call): 296 nsec/call
clock-getres-monotonic:    libc(vdso): 5 nsec/call


I agree with you though when you say that caching it in the libc is a
possibility to overcome the performance impact.

> We shouldn't just need it for consistency because all callers
> would require implementing a fallback to the system call
> anyway, to deal with old kernels.
> 

A way to address this issue would be to use versioning, which seems supported in
the vdso library (i.e. arch/x86/entry/vdso/vdso32/vdso32.lds.S).

For example for x86 (vdso32) we would have something like:

VERSION
{
	LINUX_5.3 (being optimistic here :) ) {
	global:
                __vdso_clock_getres;
                __vdso_clock_gettime64;
        };
        LINUX_2.6 {
        global:
                __vdso_clock_gettime;
                __vdso_gettimeofday;
                __vdso_time;
        };

        LINUX_2.5 {
        global:
                __kernel_vsyscall;
                __kernel_sigreturn;
                __kernel_rt_sigreturn;
        local: *;
        };
}

What do you think? Would this be a viable solution?

> If anyone comes up with a good reason why it should be added
> after all, let me know and I'll stop mentioning it.
> 
>       Arnd
> 

-- 
Regards,
Vincenzo

  reply index

Thread overview: 69+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-30 14:15 Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 01/19] kernel: Standardize vdso_datapage Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-31  8:16   ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-06-04 12:05     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-10 17:47       ` Huw Davies
2019-06-10  9:27   ` Huw Davies
2019-06-10 10:17     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-10 10:31       ` Huw Davies
2019-06-10 11:07         ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-10 11:37           ` Huw Davies
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 02/19] kernel: Define gettimeofday vdso common code Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-31  8:19   ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-06-04 12:08     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-10  9:31   ` Huw Davies
2019-06-10 10:18     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 03/19] kernel: Unify update_vsyscall implementation Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-10  9:34   ` Huw Davies
2019-06-10 10:19     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-14 11:10   ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-06-14 12:15     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-14 12:19       ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-06-14 12:25         ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-14 13:07           ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 04/19] arm64: Substitute gettimeofday with C implementation Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 05/19] arm64: Build vDSO with -ffixed-x18 Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 06/19] arm64: compat: Add missing syscall numbers Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 07/19] arm64: compat: Expose signal related structures Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 08/19] arm64: compat: Generate asm offsets for signals Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 09/19] lib: vdso: Add compat support Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 10/19] arm64: compat: Add vDSO Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 11/19] arm64: Refactor vDSO code Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 12/19] arm64: compat: vDSO setup for compat layer Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 13/19] arm64: elf: vDSO code page discovery Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 14/19] arm64: compat: Get sigreturn trampolines from vDSO Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 15/19] arm64: Add vDSO compat support Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-01  9:38   ` Catalin Marinas
2019-06-04 12:10     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 16/19] arm: Add support for generic vDSO Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-31  8:32   ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 17/19] mips: " Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-31  8:34   ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-06-03 14:54     ` Mark Salyzyn
2019-06-03 17:07       ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 18/19] x86: " Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-30 15:41   ` Michael Kelley
2019-06-04 12:13     ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-14 11:15     ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-06-14 21:17       ` Sasha Levin
2019-06-22 14:46         ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-06-23 19:09           ` Sasha Levin
2019-06-23 21:58             ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-06-24  0:24               ` Sasha Levin
2019-06-24  1:20                 ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-06-23 22:12             ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-06-24  0:04               ` Michael Kelley
2019-06-24  0:25                 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-06-28 18:40                   ` Michael Kelley
2019-05-30 14:15 ` [PATCH v6 19/19] kselftest: Extend vDSO selftest Vincenzo Frascino
2019-05-31  8:53   ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-05-31  8:46 ` [PATCH v6 00/19] Unify vDSOs across more architectures Arnd Bergmann
2019-06-04 12:04   ` Vincenzo Frascino [this message]
2019-06-04 12:12     ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-06-05 14:32       ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-14 12:16     ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-06-14 12:19       ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-20  6:17 ` Shijith Thotton
2019-06-20  8:55   ` Vincenzo Frascino
2019-06-20 16:27 ` Andre Przywara
2019-06-21  9:11   ` Vincenzo Frascino

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=d96667d5-e43b-d33a-fbd0-5acfb4904316@arm.com \
    --to=vincenzo.frascino@arm.com \
    --cc=0x7f454c46@gmail.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=huw@codeweavers.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
    --cc=paul.burton@mips.com \
    --cc=pcc@google.com \
    --cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=salyzyn@android.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /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

Linux-MIPS Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mips/0 linux-mips/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-mips linux-mips/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mips \
		linux-mips@vger.kernel.org linux-mips@archiver.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-mips


Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-mips


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox