linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
	Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
	Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 5/9] x86/ioport: Reduce ioperm impact for sane usage further
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2019 17:11:15 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wjXcS--G3Wd8ZGEOdCNRAWPaUneyN1ryShQL-_yi1kvOA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191106202806.241007755@linutronix.de>

On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 12:57 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Calculate both the position of the first zero bit and the last zero bit to
> limit the range which needs to be copied. This does not solve the problem
> when the previous tasked had only byte 0 cleared and the next one has only
> byte 65535 cleared, but trying to solve that would be too complex and
> heavyweight for the context switch path. As the ioperm() usage is very rare
> the case which is optimized is the single task/process which uses ioperm().

Hmm.

I may read this patch wrong, but from what I can tell, if we really
have just one process with an io bitmap, we're doing unnecessary
copies.

If we really have just one process that has an iobitmap, I think we
could just keep the bitmap of that process entirely unchanged. Then,
when we switch away from it, we set the io_bitmap_base to an invalid
base outside the TSS segment, and when we switch back, we set it back
to the valid one. No actual bitmap copies at all.

So I think that rather than the "begin/end offset" games, we should
perhaps have a "what was the last process that used the IO bitmap for
this TSS" pointer (and, I think, some sequence counter, so that when
the process updates its bitmap, it invalidates that case)?

 Of course, you can do *nboth*, but if we really think that the common
case is "one special process", then I think the begin/end offset is
useless, but a "last bitmap process" would be very useful.

Am I missing something?

               Linus

  reply	other threads:[~2019-11-07  1:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-11-06 19:34 [patch 0/9] x86/iopl: Prevent user space from using CLI/STI with iopl(3) Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-06 19:35 ` [patch 1/9] x86/ptrace: Prevent truncation of bitmap size Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-07  7:31   ` Ingo Molnar
2019-11-06 19:35 ` [patch 2/9] x86/process: Unify copy_thread_tls() Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-08 22:31   ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-08 23:43     ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-10 12:36       ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-10 16:56         ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-11  8:52           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-06 19:35 ` [patch 3/9] x86/cpu: Unify cpu_init() Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-08 22:34   ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-06 19:35 ` [patch 4/9] x86/io: Speedup schedule out of I/O bitmap user Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-07  9:12   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-07 14:04     ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-07 14:08       ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-08 22:41         ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-08 23:45           ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-09  3:32             ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-10 12:43               ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-09  0:24   ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-06 19:35 ` [patch 5/9] x86/ioport: Reduce ioperm impact for sane usage further Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-07  1:11   ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2019-11-07  7:44     ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-07  8:25     ` Ingo Molnar
2019-11-07  9:17       ` Willy Tarreau
2019-11-07 10:00         ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-07 10:13           ` Willy Tarreau
2019-11-07 10:19           ` hpa
2019-11-07 10:27             ` Willy Tarreau
2019-11-07 10:50               ` hpa
2019-11-07 12:56                 ` Willy Tarreau
2019-11-07 16:45                   ` Eric W. Biederman
2019-11-07 16:53                     ` Linus Torvalds
2019-11-07 16:57                     ` Willy Tarreau
2019-11-10 17:17       ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-07  7:37   ` Ingo Molnar
2019-11-07  7:45     ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-07  8:16   ` Ingo Molnar
2019-11-07 18:02     ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-07 19:24   ` Brian Gerst
2019-11-07 19:54     ` Linus Torvalds
2019-11-07 21:00       ` Brian Gerst
2019-11-07 21:32         ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-07 23:20           ` hpa
2019-11-07 21:44         ` Linus Torvalds
2019-11-08  1:12           ` H. Peter Anvin
2019-11-08  2:12             ` Brian Gerst
2019-11-10 17:21           ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-06 19:35 ` [patch 6/9] x86/iopl: Fixup misleading comment Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-06 19:35 ` [patch 7/9] x86/iopl: Restrict iopl() permission scope Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-07  9:09   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-10 17:26   ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-10 20:31     ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-10 21:05       ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-10 21:21         ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-06 19:35 ` [patch 8/9] x86/iopl: Remove legacy IOPL option Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-07  6:11   ` Jürgen Groß
2019-11-07  6:26     ` hpa
2019-11-07 16:44     ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-11-07  9:13   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-06 19:35 ` [patch 9/9] selftests/x86/iopl: Verify that CLI/STI result in #GP Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-07  7:28 ` [patch] x86/iopl: Remove unused local variable, update comments in ksys_ioperm() Ingo Molnar

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-=wjXcS--G3Wd8ZGEOdCNRAWPaUneyN1ryShQL-_yi1kvOA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=w@1wt.eu \
    --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).