Re: [PATCH] uprobes: switch to RCU Tasks Trace flavor for better performance

From: Google
Date: Fri Sep 13 2024 - 21:40:31 EST

On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 10:43:12 -0700
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> This patch switches uprobes SRCU usage to RCU Tasks Trace flavor, which
> is optimized for more lightweight and quick readers (at the expense of
> slower writers, which for uprobes is a fine tradeof) and has better
> performance and scalability with number of CPUs.
>
> Similarly to baseline vs SRCU, we've benchmarked SRCU-based
> implementation vs RCU Tasks Trace implementation.
>
> SRCU
> ====
> uprobe-nop ( 1 cpus): 3.276 ± 0.005M/s ( 3.276M/s/cpu)
> uprobe-nop ( 2 cpus): 4.125 ± 0.002M/s ( 2.063M/s/cpu)
> uprobe-nop ( 4 cpus): 7.713 ± 0.002M/s ( 1.928M/s/cpu)
> uprobe-nop ( 8 cpus): 8.097 ± 0.006M/s ( 1.012M/s/cpu)
> uprobe-nop (16 cpus): 6.501 ± 0.056M/s ( 0.406M/s/cpu)
> uprobe-nop (32 cpus): 4.398 ± 0.084M/s ( 0.137M/s/cpu)
> uprobe-nop (64 cpus): 6.452 ± 0.000M/s ( 0.101M/s/cpu)
>
> uretprobe-nop ( 1 cpus): 2.055 ± 0.001M/s ( 2.055M/s/cpu)
> uretprobe-nop ( 2 cpus): 2.677 ± 0.000M/s ( 1.339M/s/cpu)
> uretprobe-nop ( 4 cpus): 4.561 ± 0.003M/s ( 1.140M/s/cpu)
> uretprobe-nop ( 8 cpus): 5.291 ± 0.002M/s ( 0.661M/s/cpu)
> uretprobe-nop (16 cpus): 5.065 ± 0.019M/s ( 0.317M/s/cpu)
> uretprobe-nop (32 cpus): 3.622 ± 0.003M/s ( 0.113M/s/cpu)
> uretprobe-nop (64 cpus): 3.723 ± 0.002M/s ( 0.058M/s/cpu)
>
> RCU Tasks Trace
> ===============
> uprobe-nop ( 1 cpus): 3.396 ± 0.002M/s ( 3.396M/s/cpu)
> uprobe-nop ( 2 cpus): 4.271 ± 0.006M/s ( 2.135M/s/cpu)
> uprobe-nop ( 4 cpus): 8.499 ± 0.015M/s ( 2.125M/s/cpu)
> uprobe-nop ( 8 cpus): 10.355 ± 0.028M/s ( 1.294M/s/cpu)
> uprobe-nop (16 cpus): 7.615 ± 0.099M/s ( 0.476M/s/cpu)
> uprobe-nop (32 cpus): 4.430 ± 0.007M/s ( 0.138M/s/cpu)
> uprobe-nop (64 cpus): 6.887 ± 0.020M/s ( 0.108M/s/cpu)
>
> uretprobe-nop ( 1 cpus): 2.174 ± 0.001M/s ( 2.174M/s/cpu)
> uretprobe-nop ( 2 cpus): 2.853 ± 0.001M/s ( 1.426M/s/cpu)
> uretprobe-nop ( 4 cpus): 4.913 ± 0.002M/s ( 1.228M/s/cpu)
> uretprobe-nop ( 8 cpus): 5.883 ± 0.002M/s ( 0.735M/s/cpu)
> uretprobe-nop (16 cpus): 5.147 ± 0.001M/s ( 0.322M/s/cpu)
> uretprobe-nop (32 cpus): 3.738 ± 0.008M/s ( 0.117M/s/cpu)
> uretprobe-nop (64 cpus): 4.397 ± 0.002M/s ( 0.069M/s/cpu)
>
> Peak throughput for uprobes increases from 8 mln/s to 10.3 mln/s
> (+28%!), and for uretprobes from 5.3 mln/s to 5.8 mln/s (+11%), as we
> have more work to do on uretprobes side.
>
> Even single-thread (no contention) performance is slightly better: 3.276
> mln/s to 3.396 mln/s (+3.5%) for uprobes, and 2.055 mln/s to 2.174 mln/s
> (+5.8%) for uretprobes.
>
> We also select TASKS_TRACE_RCU for UPROBES in Kconfig due to the new
> dependency.
>

Looks good to me. Peter, do you have any comment?

Reviewed-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx>


> Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/Kconfig | 1 +
> kernel/events/uprobes.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++----------------------
> 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/Kconfig b/arch/Kconfig
> index 975dd22a2dbd..a0df3f3dc484 100644
> --- a/arch/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/Kconfig
> @@ -126,6 +126,7 @@ config KPROBES_ON_FTRACE
> config UPROBES
> def_bool n
> depends on ARCH_SUPPORTS_UPROBES
> + select TASKS_TRACE_RCU
> help
> Uprobes is the user-space counterpart to kprobes: they
> enable instrumentation applications (such as 'perf probe')
> diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> index 4b7e590dc428..a2e6a57f79f2 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
> #include <linux/task_work.h>
> #include <linux/shmem_fs.h>
> #include <linux/khugepaged.h>
> +#include <linux/rcupdate_trace.h>
>
> #include <linux/uprobes.h>
>
> @@ -42,8 +43,6 @@ static struct rb_root uprobes_tree = RB_ROOT;
> static DEFINE_RWLOCK(uprobes_treelock); /* serialize rbtree access */
> static seqcount_rwlock_t uprobes_seqcount = SEQCNT_RWLOCK_ZERO(uprobes_seqcount, &uprobes_treelock);
>
> -DEFINE_STATIC_SRCU(uprobes_srcu);
> -
> #define UPROBES_HASH_SZ 13
> /* serialize uprobe->pending_list */
> static struct mutex uprobes_mmap_mutex[UPROBES_HASH_SZ];
> @@ -652,7 +651,7 @@ static void put_uprobe(struct uprobe *uprobe)
> delayed_uprobe_remove(uprobe, NULL);
> mutex_unlock(&delayed_uprobe_lock);
>
> - call_srcu(&uprobes_srcu, &uprobe->rcu, uprobe_free_rcu);
> + call_rcu_tasks_trace(&uprobe->rcu, uprobe_free_rcu);
> }
>
> static __always_inline
> @@ -707,7 +706,7 @@ static struct uprobe *find_uprobe_rcu(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset)
> struct rb_node *node;
> unsigned int seq;
>
> - lockdep_assert(srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu));
> + lockdep_assert(rcu_read_lock_trace_held());
>
> do {
> seq = read_seqcount_begin(&uprobes_seqcount);
> @@ -935,8 +934,7 @@ static bool filter_chain(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct mm_struct *mm)
> bool ret = false;
>
> down_read(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem);
> - list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
> - srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
> + list_for_each_entry_rcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, rcu_read_lock_trace_held()) {
> ret = consumer_filter(uc, mm);
> if (ret)
> break;
> @@ -1157,7 +1155,7 @@ void uprobe_unregister_sync(void)
> * unlucky enough caller can free consumer's memory and cause
> * handler_chain() or handle_uretprobe_chain() to do an use-after-free.
> */
> - synchronize_srcu(&uprobes_srcu);
> + synchronize_rcu_tasks_trace();
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(uprobe_unregister_sync);
>
> @@ -1241,19 +1239,18 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(uprobe_register);
> int uprobe_apply(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc, bool add)
> {
> struct uprobe_consumer *con;
> - int ret = -ENOENT, srcu_idx;
> + int ret = -ENOENT;
>
> down_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
>
> - srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&uprobes_srcu);
> - list_for_each_entry_srcu(con, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
> - srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
> + rcu_read_lock_trace();
> + list_for_each_entry_rcu(con, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, rcu_read_lock_trace_held()) {
> if (con == uc) {
> ret = register_for_each_vma(uprobe, add ? uc : NULL);
> break;
> }
> }
> - srcu_read_unlock(&uprobes_srcu, srcu_idx);
> + rcu_read_unlock_trace();
>
> up_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
>
> @@ -2123,8 +2120,7 @@ static void handler_chain(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
>
> current->utask->auprobe = &uprobe->arch;
>
> - list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
> - srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
> + list_for_each_entry_rcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, rcu_read_lock_trace_held()) {
> int rc = 0;
>
> if (uc->handler) {
> @@ -2162,15 +2158,13 @@ handle_uretprobe_chain(struct return_instance *ri, struct pt_regs *regs)
> {
> struct uprobe *uprobe = ri->uprobe;
> struct uprobe_consumer *uc;
> - int srcu_idx;
>
> - srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&uprobes_srcu);
> - list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
> - srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
> + rcu_read_lock_trace();
> + list_for_each_entry_rcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, rcu_read_lock_trace_held()) {
> if (uc->ret_handler)
> uc->ret_handler(uc, ri->func, regs);
> }
> - srcu_read_unlock(&uprobes_srcu, srcu_idx);
> + rcu_read_unlock_trace();
> }
>
> static struct return_instance *find_next_ret_chain(struct return_instance *ri)
> @@ -2255,13 +2249,13 @@ static void handle_swbp(struct pt_regs *regs)
> {
> struct uprobe *uprobe;
> unsigned long bp_vaddr;
> - int is_swbp, srcu_idx;
> + int is_swbp;
>
> bp_vaddr = uprobe_get_swbp_addr(regs);
> if (bp_vaddr == uprobe_get_trampoline_vaddr())
> return uprobe_handle_trampoline(regs);
>
> - srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&uprobes_srcu);
> + rcu_read_lock_trace();
>
> uprobe = find_active_uprobe_rcu(bp_vaddr, &is_swbp);
> if (!uprobe) {
> @@ -2319,7 +2313,7 @@ static void handle_swbp(struct pt_regs *regs)
>
> out:
> /* arch_uprobe_skip_sstep() succeeded, or restart if can't singlestep */
> - srcu_read_unlock(&uprobes_srcu, srcu_idx);
> + rcu_read_unlock_trace();
> }
>
> /*
> --
> 2.43.5
>


--
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx>