-
wanghongzhe authored
According to Kees's suggest, we started with the patch that just replaces rmb() with smp_rmb() and did a performance test with UnixBench. The results showed the overhead about 2.53% in rmb() test compared to the smp_rmb() one, in a x86-64 kernel with CONFIG_SMP enabled running inside a qemu-kvm vm. The test is a "syscall" testcase in UnixBench, which executes 5 syscalls in a loop during a certain timeout (100 second in our test) and counts the total number of executions of this 5-syscall sequence. We set a seccomp filter with all allow rule for all used syscalls in this test (which will go bitmap path) to make sure the rmb() will be executed. The details for the test: with rmb(): /txm # ./syscall_allow_min 100 COUNT|35861159|1|lps /txm # ./syscall_allow_min 100 COUNT|35545501|1|lps /txm # ./syscall_allow_min 100 COUNT|35664495|1|lps with smp_rmb(): /txm # ./syscall_allow_min 100 COUNT|36552771|1|lps /txm # ./syscall_allow_min 100 COUNT|36491247|1|lps /txm # ./syscall_allow_min 100 COUNT|36504746|1|lps For a x86-64 kernel with CONFIG_SMP enabled, the smp_rmb() is just a compiler barrier() which have no impact in runtime, while rmb() is a lfence which will prevent all memory access operations (not just load according the recently claim by Intel) behind itself. We can also figure it out in disassembly: with rmb(): 0000000000001430 <__seccomp_filter>: 1430: 41 57 push %r15 1432: 41 56 push %r14 1434: 41 55 push %r13 1436: 41 54 push %r12 1438: 55 push %rbp 1439: 53 push %rbx 143a: 48 81 ec 90 00 00 00 sub $0x90,%rsp 1441: 89 7c 24 10 mov %edi,0x10(%rsp) 1445: 89 54 24 14 mov %edx,0x14(%rsp) 1449: 65 48 8b 04 25 28 00 mov %gs:0x28,%rax 1450: 00 00 1452: 48 89 84 24 88 00 00 mov %rax,0x88(%rsp) 1459: 00 145a: 31 c0 xor %eax,%eax * 145c: 0f ae e8 lfence 145f: 48 85 f6 test %rsi,%rsi 1462: 49 89 f4 mov %rsi,%r12 1465: 0f 84 42 03 00 00 je 17ad <__seccomp_filter+0x37d> 146b: 65 48 8b 04 25 00 00 mov %gs:0x0,%rax 1472: 00 00 1474: 48 8b 98 80 07 00 00 mov 0x780(%rax),%rbx 147b: 48 85 db test %rbx,%rbx with smp_rmb(); 0000000000001430 <__seccomp_filter>: 1430: 41 57 push %r15 1432: 41 56 push %r14 1434: 41 55 push %r13 1436: 41 54 push %r12 1438: 55 push %rbp 1439: 53 push %rbx 143a: 48 81 ec 90 00 00 00 sub $0x90,%rsp 1441: 89 7c 24 10 mov %edi,0x10(%rsp) 1445: 89 54 24 14 mov %edx,0x14(%rsp) 1449: 65 48 8b 04 25 28 00 mov %gs:0x28,%rax 1450: 00 00 1452: 48 89 84 24 88 00 00 mov %rax,0x88(%rsp) 1459: 00 145a: 31 c0 xor %eax,%eax 145c: 48 85 f6 test %rsi,%rsi 145f: 49 89 f4 mov %rsi,%r12 1462: 0f 84 42 03 00 00 je 17aa <__seccomp_filter+0x37a> 1468: 65 48 8b 04 25 00 00 mov %gs:0x0,%rax 146f: 00 00 1471: 48 8b 98 80 07 00 00 mov 0x780(%rax),%rbx 1478: 48 85 db test %rbx,%rbx Signed-off-by: wanghongzhe <wanghongzhe@huawei.com> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1612496049-32507-1-git-send-email-wanghongzhe@huawei.com
a381b70a