ctx->major contains the current syscall number. This is, of course, a
constant for the duration of the syscall. Unfortunately, GCC's alias
analysis cannot prove that it is not modified via a pointer in the
audit_filter_syscall() loop, and so always loads it from memory.

In and of itself the load isn't very expensive (ops dependent on the
ctx->major load are only used to determine the direction of control flow
and have short dependence chains and, in any case the related branches
get predicted perfectly in the fastpath) but still cache ctx->major
in a local for two reasons:

* ctx->major is in the first cacheline of struct audit_context and has
  similar alignment as audit_entry::list audit_entry. For cases
  with a lot of audit rules, doing this reduces one source of contention
  from a potentially busy cache-set.

* audit_in_mask() (called in the hot loop in audit_filter_syscall())
  does cast manipulation and error checking on ctx->major:

     audit_in_mask(const struct audit_krule *rule, unsigned long val):
             if (val > 0xffffffff)
                     return false;

             word = AUDIT_WORD(val);
             if (word >= AUDIT_BITMASK_SIZE)
                     return false;

             bit = AUDIT_BIT(val);

             return rule->mask[word] & bit;

  The clauses related to the rule need to be evaluated in the loop, but
  the rest is unnecessarily re-evaluated for every loop iteration.
  (Note, however, that most of these are cheap ALU ops and the branches
   are perfectly predicted. However, see discussion on cycles
   improvement below for more on why it is still worth hoisting.)

On a Skylakex system change in getpid() latency (aggregated over
12 boot cycles):

             Min     Mean  Median     Max       pstdev
            (ns)     (ns)    (ns)    (ns)

 -        201.30   216.14  216.22  228.46      (+- 1.45%)
 +        196.63   207.86  206.60  230.98      (+- 3.92%)

Performance counter stats for 'bin/getpid' (3 runs) go from:
    cycles               836.89  (  +-   .80% )
    instructions        2000.19  (  +-   .03% )
    IPC                    2.39  (  +-   .83% )
    branches             430.14  (  +-   .03% )
    branch-misses          1.48  (  +-  3.37% )
    L1-dcache-loads      471.11  (  +-   .05% )
    L1-dcache-load-misses  7.62  (  +- 46.98% )

 to:
    cycles               805.58  (  +-  4.11% )
    instructions        1654.11  (  +-   .05% )
    IPC                    2.06  (  +-  3.39% )
    branches             430.02  (  +-   .05% )
    branch-misses          1.55  (  +-  7.09% )
    L1-dcache-loads      440.01  (  +-   .09% )
    L1-dcache-load-misses  9.05  (  +- 74.03% )

(Both aggregated over 12 boot cycles.)

instructions: we reduce around 8 instructions/iteration because some of
the computation is now hoisted out of the loop (branch count does not
change because GCC, for reasons unclear, only hoists the computations
while keeping the basic-blocks.)

cycles: improve by about 5% (in aggregate and looking at individual run
numbers.) This is likely because we now waste fewer pipeline resources
on unnecessary instructions which allows the control flow to
speculatively execute further ahead shortening the execution of the loop
a little. The final gating factor on the performance of this loop
remains the long dependence chain due to the linked-list load.
Signed-off-by: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>