lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Oct]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] mm, page_alloc: reduce static keys in prep_new_page()
Date
On 10/27/20 10:10 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 26.10.20 18:33, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> prep_new_page() will always zero a new page (regardless of __GFP_ZERO) when
>> init_on_alloc is enabled, but will also always skip zeroing if the page was
>> already zeroed on free by init_on_free or page poisoning.
>>
>> The latter check implemented by free_pages_prezeroed() can involve two
>> different static keys. As prep_new_page() is really a hot path, let's introduce
>> a single static key free_pages_not_prezeroed for this purpose and initialize it
>> in init_mem_debugging().
>
> Is this actually observable in practice? This smells like
> micro-optimization to me.
>
> Also, I thought the whole reason for static keys is to have basically no
> overhead at runtime, so I wonder if replacing two static key checks by a
> single one actually makes *some* difference.

You're right, the difference seems to be just a single NOP. The static key
infrastructure seems to be working really well.
(At least the asm inspection made me realize that kernel_poison_pages() is
called unconditionally and the static key is checked inside, not inline so I'll
be amending patch 2...)

Initially I thought I would be reducing 3 keys to 1 in this patch, but I got the
code wrong. So unless others think it's a readability improvements, we can drop
this patch.

Or we can also reconsider this whole optimization. If the point is to be
paranoid and enable both init_on_free and init_on_alloc, should we trust that
nobody wrote something after the clearing on free via use-after-free? :) Kees/Alex?


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-10-27 12:05    [W:0.117 / U:0.432 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site