From patchwork Thu May 19 20:20:29 2022 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Song Liu X-Patchwork-Id: 12856015 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CB76C4332F for ; Thu, 19 May 2022 20:23:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 50ABA6B0071; Thu, 19 May 2022 16:23:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 4B9696B0073; Thu, 19 May 2022 16:23:38 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 380EB6B0075; Thu, 19 May 2022 16:23:38 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0016.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.16]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 296386B0071 for ; Thu, 19 May 2022 16:23:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin17.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 017C733F05 for ; Thu, 19 May 2022 20:23:37 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79483618116.17.2A176D0 Received: from mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com (mx0b-00082601.pphosted.com [67.231.153.30]) by imf25.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FDABA00C8 for ; Thu, 19 May 2022 20:23:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pps.filterd (m0001303.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0001303.ppops.net (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 24JFG5Ql013062 for ; Thu, 19 May 2022 13:23:36 -0700 Received: from maileast.thefacebook.com ([163.114.130.16]) by m0001303.ppops.net (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3g4myhxqar-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 19 May 2022 13:23:36 -0700 Received: from twshared14818.18.frc3.facebook.com (2620:10d:c0a8:1b::d) by mail.thefacebook.com (2620:10d:c0a8:83::5) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.28; Thu, 19 May 2022 13:23:35 -0700 Received: by devbig932.frc1.facebook.com (Postfix, from userid 4523) id E4FD17D58F5F; Thu, 19 May 2022 13:20:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Song Liu To: , , CC: , , , , , , , Song Liu Subject: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/8] bpf_prog_pack followup Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 13:20:29 -0700 Message-ID: <20220519202037.2401584-1-song@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.30.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-FB-Internal: Safe X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: Mq2QxrNxFedIkhfQmuWgpIWBoae_2TdL X-Proofpoint-GUID: Mq2QxrNxFedIkhfQmuWgpIWBoae_2TdL X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.874,Hydra:6.0.486,FMLib:17.11.64.514 definitions=2022-05-19_06,2022-05-19_03,2022-02-23_01 X-Stat-Signature: xre4ebufdqwahkpcrzuhcpfghe1d4qaj X-Rspamd-Server: rspam07 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 7FDABA00C8 X-Rspam-User: Authentication-Results: imf25.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; spf=none (imf25.hostedemail.com: domain of "prvs=61387cfd06=songliubraving@fb.com" has no SPF policy when checking 67.231.153.30) smtp.mailfrom="prvs=61387cfd06=songliubraving@fb.com"; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, No valid DKIM" header.from=kernel.org (policy=none) X-HE-Tag: 1652991792-105069 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: Changes v1 => v2: 1. Add WARN to set_vm_flush_reset_perms() on huge pages. (Rick Edgecombe) 2. Simplify select_bpf_prog_pack_size. (Rick Edgecombe) As of 5.18-rc6, x86_64 uses bpf_prog_pack on 4kB pages. This set contains a few followups: 1/8 - 3/8 fills unused part of bpf_prog_pack with illegal instructions. 4/8 - 5/8 enables bpf_prog_pack on 2MB pages. The primary goal of bpf_prog_pack is to reduce iTLB miss rate and reduce direct memory mapping fragmentation. This leads to non-trivial performance improvements. For our web service production benchmark, bpf_prog_pack on 4kB pages gives 0.5% to 0.7% more throughput than not using bpf_prog_pack. bpf_prog_pack on 2MB pages 0.6% to 0.9% more throughput than not using bpf_prog_pack. Note that 0.5% is a huge improvement for our fleet. I believe this is also significant for other companies with many thousand servers. bpf_prog_pack on 2MB pages may use slightly more memory for systems without many BPF programs. However, such waste in memory (<2MB) is within noisy for modern x86_64 systems. Song Liu (8): bpf: fill new bpf_prog_pack with illegal instructions x86/alternative: introduce text_poke_set bpf: introduce bpf_arch_text_invalidate for bpf_prog_pack module: introduce module_alloc_huge bpf: use module_alloc_huge for bpf_prog_pack vmalloc: WARN for set_vm_flush_reset_perms() on huge pages vmalloc: introduce huge_vmalloc_supported bpf: simplify select_bpf_prog_pack_size arch/x86/include/asm/text-patching.h | 1 + arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++----- arch/x86/kernel/module.c | 21 +++++++++ arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 5 +++ include/linux/bpf.h | 1 + include/linux/moduleloader.h | 5 +++ include/linux/vmalloc.h | 3 ++ kernel/bpf/core.c | 42 +++++++++-------- kernel/module.c | 8 ++++ mm/vmalloc.c | 5 +++ 10 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) --- 2.30.2