diff options
authorLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2021-01-07 09:43:54 -0800
committerLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2021-01-08 11:06:29 -0800
commitef0ba05538299f1391cbe097de36895bb36ecfe6 (patch)
parenta91bd6223ecd46addc71ee6fcd432206d39365d2 (diff)
poll: fix performance regression due to out-of-line __put_user()
The kernel test robot reported a -5.8% performance regression on the "poll2" test of will-it-scale, and bisected it to commit d55564cfc222 ("x86: Make __put_user() generate an out-of-line call"). I didn't expect an out-of-line __put_user() to matter, because no normal core code should use that non-checking legacy version of user access any more. But I had overlooked the very odd poll() usage, which does a __put_user() to update the 'revents' values of the poll array. Now, Al Viro correctly points out that instead of updating just the 'revents' field, it would be much simpler to just copy the _whole_ pollfd entry, and then we could just use "copy_to_user()" on the whole array of entries, the same way we use "copy_from_user()" a few lines earlier to get the original values. But that is not what we've traditionally done, and I worry that threaded applications might be concurrently modifying the other fields of the pollfd array. So while Al's suggestion is simpler - and perhaps worth trying in the future - this instead keeps the "just update revents" model. To fix the performance regression, use the modern "unsafe_put_user()" instead of __put_user(), with the proper "user_write_access_begin()" guarding in place. This improves code generation enormously. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210107134723.GA28532@xsang-OptiPlex-9020/ Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com> Tested-by: Oliver Sang <oliver.sang@intel.com> Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
1 files changed, 11 insertions, 3 deletions
diff --git a/fs/select.c b/fs/select.c
index ebfebdfe5c69..37aaa8317f3a 100644
--- a/fs/select.c
+++ b/fs/select.c
@@ -1011,14 +1011,17 @@ static int do_sys_poll(struct pollfd __user *ufds, unsigned int nfds,
fdcount = do_poll(head, &table, end_time);
+ if (!user_write_access_begin(ufds, nfds * sizeof(*ufds)))
+ goto out_fds;
for (walk = head; walk; walk = walk->next) {
struct pollfd *fds = walk->entries;
int j;
- for (j = 0; j < walk->len; j++, ufds++)
- if (__put_user(fds[j].revents, &ufds->revents))
- goto out_fds;
+ for (j = walk->len; j; fds++, ufds++, j--)
+ unsafe_put_user(fds->revents, &ufds->revents, Efault);
+ user_write_access_end();
err = fdcount;
@@ -1030,6 +1033,11 @@ out_fds:
return err;
+ user_write_access_end();
+ err = -EFAULT;
+ goto out_fds;
static long do_restart_poll(struct restart_block *restart_block)