x86/sgx: NUMA
Jarkko Sakkinen
maintainerv4 cover x86/sgx: NUMA
Make sgx_alloc_epc_page() more balanced among the NUMA nodes, refactoring hierarchical listi into a single global free list managed in FIFO fashion.
Introduce NUMA node local free EPC page lists. In sgx_alloc_epc_page(), try first to allocate from the local free list, and fallback to global free list, if the local list is empty.
v3:
* Expanded into a full patch set, which also implements more balanced EPC allocation among the NUMA nodes. Since none of the patches fully match the previous single patch entry, included earlier change log to the cover letter.
v2:
* s/section_list/numa_section_list/
* s/MAX_NUMNODES//num_possible_nodes()/
* Add more verbose inline comments that Dave provided.
* If NUMA mapping fails, print a warning and description of the fallback. The physical address is already printed in pr_info(), just before the mapping happens.
Jarkko Sakkinen (3):
x86/sgx: Use sgx_free_epc_page() in sgx_reclaim_pages() x86/sgx: Replace section local dirty page lists with a global list x86/sgx: Add a basic NUMA allocation scheme to sgx_alloc_epc_page()
arch/x86/Kconfig | 1 + arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c | 203 ++++++++++++++++++--------------- arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/sgx.h | 23 ++-- 3 files changed, 121 insertions(+), 106 deletions(-)
Signature · 1 line
2.30.2
Jarkko Sakkinen
maintainerPATCH v4 1/3 x86/sgx: Use sgx_free_epc_page() in sgx_reclaim_pages()
Replace the ad-hoc code with a sgx_free_epc_page(), in order to make sure that all the relevant checks and book keeping is done, while freeing a borrowed EPC page, and remove redundant code. EREMOVE inside sgx_free_epc_page() does not change the semantics, as EREMOVE to an uninitialize pages is a nop.
---
v4:
* Rewrote the commit message.
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c | 7 +------ 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +1 -6
@@ -305,7 +305,6 @@ static void sgx_reclaim_pages(void) {struct sgx_epc_page *chunk[SGX_NR_TO_SCAN ];struct sgx_backing backing[SGX_NR_TO_SCAN ]; -struct sgx_epc_section *section;struct sgx_encl_page *encl_page;struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page;pgoff_t page_index;
@@ -378,11 +377,7 @@ static void sgx_reclaim_pages(void)kref_put (&encl_page->encl->refcount, sgx_encl_release); epc_page->flags &= ~SGX_EPC_PAGE_RECLAIMER_TRACKED ; - section = &sgx_epc_sections[epc_page->section]; -spin_lock (§ion->lock); -list_add_tail (&epc_page->list, §ion->page_list); - section->free_cnt++; -spin_unlock (§ion->lock); +sgx_free_epc_page (epc_page); } }
Signature · 1 line
2.30.2
Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] x86/sgx: Use sgx_free_epc_page() in sgx_reclaim_pages()
Quoted 5 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Replace the ad-hoc code with a
sgx_free_epc_page(), in order to make sure that all the relevant checks and book keeping is done, while freeing a borrowed EPC page, and remove redundant code. EREMOVE insidesgx_free_epc_page()does not change the semantics, as EREMOVE to an uninitialize pages is a nop.
^ uninitialized
I know this is a short patch, but this changelog still falls a bit short for me.
Why is this patch a part of _this_ series? What *problem* does it solve, related to this series?
It would also be nice to remind me why the EREMOVE is redundant. Why didn't we need one before? What put the page in the uninitialized state? Is EREMOVE guaranteed to do nothing? How expensive is it?
Quoted 26 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +1
-6@@ -305,7 +305,6 @@ static void sgx_reclaim_pages(void) {struct sgx_epc_page *chunk[SGX_NR_TO_SCAN ];struct sgx_backing backing[SGX_NR_TO_SCAN ]; -struct sgx_epc_section *section;struct sgx_encl_page *encl_page;struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page;pgoff_t page_index;@@ -378,11 +377,7 @@ static void sgx_reclaim_pages(void)kref_put (&encl_page->encl->refcount, sgx_encl_release); epc_page->flags &= ~SGX_EPC_PAGE_RECLAIMER_TRACKED ; - section = &sgx_epc_sections[epc_page->section]; -spin_lock (§ion->lock); -list_add_tail (&epc_page->list, §ion->page_list); - section->free_cnt++; -spin_unlock (§ion->lock); +sgx_free_epc_page (epc_page); } }
Jarkko Sakkinen
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 1/3] x86/sgx: Use sgx_free_epc_page() in sgx_reclaim_pages()
Quoted 7 lines · Dave Hansen
Quoted 5 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Replace the ad-hoc code with a
sgx_free_epc_page(), in order to make sure that all the relevant checks and book keeping is done, while freeing a borrowed EPC page, and remove redundant code. EREMOVE insidesgx_free_epc_page()does not change the semantics, as EREMOVE to an uninitialize pages is a nop.
Quoted 7 lines
^ uninitialized
I know this is a short patch, but this changelog still falls a bit short for me.
Why is this patch a part of _this_ series? What *problem* does it solve, related to this series?
I'm thinking of merging sgx_epc_section and sgx_numa_node. That's why I kept it as part of the series.
Also, in any case it's better to clean up duplicate functionality. The code is essentially open coded implementation of sgx_free_epc_page() without EREMOVE.
Quoted 3 lines
It would also be nice to remind me why the EREMOVE is redundant. Why didn't we need one before? What put the page in the uninitialized state? Is EREMOVE guaranteed to do nothing? How expensive is it?
EREMOVE gets removed by KVM series from sgx_free_epc_page() anyway.
Maybe should re-send this patch, or series, after KVM series is merged. Then there is no explaining with EREMOVE, as sgx_free_epc_page() won't contain it.
/Jarkko
Jarkko Sakkinen
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 1/3] x86/sgx: Use sgx_free_epc_page() in sgx_reclaim_pages()
Quoted 27 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Quoted 7 lines · Dave Hansen
Quoted 5 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Replace the ad-hoc code with a
sgx_free_epc_page(), in order to make sure that all the relevant checks and book keeping is done, while freeing a borrowed EPC page, and remove redundant code. EREMOVE insidesgx_free_epc_page()does not change the semantics, as EREMOVE to an uninitialize pages is a nop.Quoted 7 lines
^ uninitialized
I know this is a short patch, but this changelog still falls a bit short for me.
Why is this patch a part of _this_ series? What *problem* does it solve, related to this series?
I'm thinking of merging
sgx_epc_sectionandsgx_numa_node. That's why I kept it as part of the series.Also, in any case it's better to clean up duplicate functionality. The code is essentially open coded implementation of
sgx_free_epc_page()without EREMOVE.Quoted 3 lines
It would also be nice to remind me why the EREMOVE is redundant. Why didn't we need one before? What put the page in the uninitialized state? Is EREMOVE guaranteed to do nothing? How expensive is it?
Quoted 5 lines
EREMOVE gets removed by KVM series from
sgx_free_epc_page()anyway.Maybe should re-send this patch, or series, after KVM series is merged. Then there is no explaining with EREMOVE, as
sgx_free_epc_page()won't contain it.
Anyway, forgot to put the end statement: I'm cool with dropping this but I'll also send this right after KVM SGX series has landed as separate patch, if I drop this now.
/Jarkko
Jarkko Sakkinen
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 1/3] x86/sgx: Use sgx_free_epc_page() in sgx_reclaim_pages()
Quoted 30 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Quoted 29 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Quoted 7 lines · Dave Hansen
Quoted 5 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Replace the ad-hoc code with a
sgx_free_epc_page(), in order to make sure that all the relevant checks and book keeping is done, while freeing a borrowed EPC page, and remove redundant code. EREMOVE insidesgx_free_epc_page()does not change the semantics, as EREMOVE to an uninitialize pages is a nop.Quoted 7 lines
^ uninitialized
I know this is a short patch, but this changelog still falls a bit short for me.
Why is this patch a part of _this_ series? What *problem* does it solve, related to this series?
I'm thinking of merging
sgx_epc_sectionandsgx_numa_node. That's why I kept it as part of the series.Also, in any case it's better to clean up duplicate functionality. The code is essentially open coded implementation of
sgx_free_epc_page()without EREMOVE.Quoted 3 lines
It would also be nice to remind me why the EREMOVE is redundant. Why didn't we need one before? What put the page in the uninitialized state? Is EREMOVE guaranteed to do nothing? How expensive is it?
EREMOVE gets removed by KVM series from
sgx_free_epc_page()anyway.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Maybe should re-send this patch, or series, after KVM series is merged. Then there is no explaining with EREMOVE, as
sgx_free_epc_page()won't contain it.Anyway, forgot to put the end statement: I'm cool with dropping this but I'll also send this right after KVM SGX series has landed as separate patch, if I drop this now.
HOLD ON :-)
I recalled why I added this patch to this patch set. I had a reason for it.
It's because of the NUMA patch. I have duplicate all the NUMA changes here if I don't refactor this somewhat redundant code out.
So, if I add a note about this to the commit message? IMHO, this is good enough reason to carry the patch.
/Jarkko
Jarkko Sakkinen
maintainerPATCH v4 2/3 x86/sgx: Replace section local dirty page lists with a global list
In reply to Jarkko SakkinenReset initialized EPC pages in sgx_dirty_page_list to uninitialized state, and free them using sgx_free_epc_page(). Do two passes, as for SECS pages the first round can fail, if all child pages have not yet been removed. The driver puts all pages on startup first to sgx_dirty_page_list, as the initialization could be triggered by kexec(), meaning that pages have been reserved for active enclaves before the operation.
The section local lists are redundant, as sgx_free_epc_page() figures out the correction by using epc_page->section.
---
v4:
* Open coded sgx_santize_section() to ksgxd().
* Rewrote the commit message.
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c | 81 ++++++++++++++++------------------ arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/sgx.h | 7 --- 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +37 -44
@@ -27,39 +27,10 @@ static LIST_HEAD(sgx_active_page_list);static DEFINE_SPINLOCK (sgx_reclaimer_lock);/* -* Reset dirty EPC pages to uninitialized state. Laundry can be left with SECS -* pages whose child pages blocked EREMOVE. +* When the driver initialized, EPC pages go first here, as they could be +* initialized to an active enclave, on kexec entry. */ -static void sgx_sanitize_section (struct sgx_epc_section *section) -{ -struct sgx_epc_page *page; -LIST_HEAD (dirty); -int ret; - -/* init_laundry_list is thread-local, no need for a lock: */ -while (!list_empty (§ion->init_laundry_list)) { -if (kthread_should_stop ()) -return ; - -/* needed for access to ->page_list: */ -spin_lock (§ion->lock); - - page =list_first_entry (§ion->init_laundry_list, - struct sgx_epc_page, list); - - ret =__eremove (sgx_get_epc_virt_addr (page)); -if (!ret) -list_move (&page->list, §ion->page_list); -else -list_move_tail (&page->list, &dirty); - -spin_unlock (§ion->lock); - -cond_resched (); - } - -list_splice (&dirty, §ion->init_laundry_list); -} +static LIST_HEAD (sgx_dirty_page_list);static bool sgx_reclaimer_age (struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page) {
@@ -400,25 +371,48 @@ static bool sgx_should_reclaim(unsigned long watermark)static int ksgxd (void *p) { -int i; +struct sgx_epc_page *page; +LIST_HEAD (dirty); +int i, ret;set_freezable ();/* -* Sanitize pages in order to recover from kexec(). The 2nd pass is -* required for SECS pages, whose child pages blocked EREMOVE. +* Reset initialized EPC pages in sgx_dirty_page_list to uninitialized state, +* and free them using sgx_free_epc_page(). Do two passes, as for SECS pages the +* first round can fail, if all child pages have not yet been removed. The +* driver puts all pages on startup first to sgx_dirty_page_list, as the +* initialization could be triggered by kexec(), meaning that pages have been +* reserved for active enclaves before the operation. */ -for (i =0 ; i < sgx_nr_epc_sections; i++) -sgx_sanitize_section (&sgx_epc_sections[i]); -for (i =0 ; i < sgx_nr_epc_sections; i++) { -sgx_sanitize_section (&sgx_epc_sections[i]); +/* sgx_dirty_page_list is thread-local to ksgxd, no need for a lock: */ +for (i =0 ; i <2 && !list_empty (&sgx_dirty_page_list); i++) { +while (!list_empty (&sgx_dirty_page_list)) { +if (kthread_should_stop ()) +return 0 ; + + page = list_first_entry(&sgx_dirty_page_list, struct sgx_epc_page, list); + + ret =__eremove (sgx_get_epc_virt_addr (page)); +if (!ret) { +/* The page is clean - move to the free list. */ +list_del (&page->list); +sgx_free_epc_page (page); + }else { +/* The page is not yet clean - move to the dirty list. */ +list_move_tail (&page->list, &dirty); + } + +cond_resched (); + } -/* Should never happen. */ -if (!list_empty (&sgx_epc_sections[i].init_laundry_list)) -WARN (1 ,"EPC section %d has unsanitized pages.\n" , i); +list_splice (&dirty, &sgx_dirty_page_list); } +if (!list_empty (&sgx_dirty_page_list)) +WARN (1 ,"EPC section %d has unsanitized pages.\n" , i); +while (!kthread_should_stop ()) {if (try_to_freeze ())continue ;
@@ -632,13 +626,12 @@ static bool __init sgx_setup_epc_section(u64 phys_addr, u64 size, section->phys_addr = phys_addr;spin_lock_init (§ion->lock);INIT_LIST_HEAD (§ion->page_list); -INIT_LIST_HEAD (§ion->init_laundry_list);for (i =0 ; i < nr_pages; i++) { section->pages[i].section = index; section->pages[i].flags =0 ; section->pages[i].owner =NULL ; -list_add_tail (§ion->pages[i].list, §ion->init_laundry_list); +list_add_tail (§ion->pages[i].list, &sgx_dirty_page_list); } section->free_cnt = nr_pages;
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/sgx.h +0 -7
@@ -45,13 +45,6 @@ struct sgx_epc_section {spinlock_t lock;struct list_head page_list;unsigned long free_cnt; - -/* -* Pages which need EREMOVE run on them before they can be -* used. Only safe to be accessed in ksgxd and init code. -* Not protected by locks. -*/ -struct list_head init_laundry_list; };extern struct sgx_epc_section sgx_epc_sections[SGX_MAX_EPC_SECTIONS ];
Signature · 1 line
2.30.2
Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] x86/sgx: Replace section local dirty page lists with a global list
Quoted 9 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Reset initialized EPC pages in
sgx_dirty_page_listto uninitialized state, and free them usingsgx_free_epc_page(). Do two passes, as for SECS pages the first round can fail, if all child pages have not yet been removed. The driver puts all pages on startup first tosgx_dirty_page_list, as the initialization could be triggered bykexec(), meaning that pages have been reserved for active enclaves before the operation.The section local lists are redundant, as
sgx_free_epc_page()figures out the correction by usingepc_page->section.
During normal runtime, the "ksgxd" daemon behaves like a version of kswapd just for SGX. But, its first job is to initialize enclave memory. This is done in a a separate thread because this initialization can be quite slow.
Currently, the SGX boot code places each enclave page on a sgx_section-local list (init_laundry_list). Once it starts up, the ksgxd code walks over that list and populates the actual SGX page allocator.
However, the per-section structures are going away to make way for the SGX NUMA allocator. There's also little need to have a per-section structure; the enclave pages are all treated identically, and they can be placed on the correct allocator list from metadata stoered in the enclave page itself.
Quoted 53 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +4
-33@@ -27,39 +27,10 @@ static LIST_HEAD(sgx_active_page_list);static DEFINE_SPINLOCK (sgx_reclaimer_lock);/* -* Reset dirty EPC pages to uninitialized state. Laundry can be left with SECS -* pages whose child pages blocked EREMOVE. +* When the driver initialized, EPC pages go first here, as they could be +* initialized to an active enclave, on kexec entry. */ -static void sgx_sanitize_section (struct sgx_epc_section *section) -{ -struct sgx_epc_page *page; -LIST_HEAD (dirty); -int ret; - -/* init_laundry_list is thread-local, no need for a lock: */ -while (!list_empty (§ion->init_laundry_list)) { -if (kthread_should_stop ()) -return ; - -/* needed for access to ->page_list: */ -spin_lock (§ion->lock); - - page =list_first_entry (§ion->init_laundry_list, - struct sgx_epc_page, list); - - ret =__eremove (sgx_get_epc_virt_addr (page)); -if (!ret) -list_move (&page->list, §ion->page_list); -else -list_move_tail (&page->list, &dirty); - -spin_unlock (§ion->lock); - -cond_resched (); - } - -list_splice (&dirty, §ion->init_laundry_list); -} +static LIST_HEAD (sgx_dirty_page_list);static bool sgx_reclaimer_age (struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page) {@@ -400,25 +371,48 @@ static bool sgx_should_reclaim(unsigned long watermark)static int ksgxd (void *p) { -int i; +struct sgx_epc_page *page;
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool sgx_should_reclaim(unsigned long watermark) · line 382
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +4
-2+LIST_HEAD (dirty); +int i, ret;set_freezable ();/* -* Sanitize pages in order to recover from kexec(). The 2nd pass is -* required for SECS pages, whose child pages blocked EREMOVE. +* Reset initialized EPC pages in sgx_dirty_page_list to uninitialized state, +* and free them using sgx_free_epc_page().
I'm not a fan of comments that tell us verbatim what the code does.
Quoted 4 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +3
-0Do two passes, as for SECS pages the + * first round can fail, if all child pages have not yet been removed. The + * driver puts all pages on startup first to sgx_dirty_page_list, as the + * initialization could be triggered by kexec(), meaning that pages have been
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool sgx_should_reclaim(unsigned long watermark)
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +1
-4+* reserved for active enclaves before the operation. */ -for (i =0 ; i < sgx_nr_epc_sections; i++) -sgx_sanitize_section (&sgx_epc_sections[i]); -for (i =0 ; i < sgx_nr_epc_sections; i++) { -sgx_sanitize_section (&sgx_epc_sections[i]);
FWIW, I don't like the removal of the helper here. I really like kernel threads' top-level function to be very understandable and clean. This makes it quite a bit harder to figure out what is going on.
For instance, we could just have a sgx_sanitize_pages() which has a local dirty list and just calls:
void sgx_santitize_pages(void)
{
LIST_HEAD(dirty);
/*
* Comment about two passes
*/
__sgx_sanitize_pages(&dirty)
__sgx_sanitize_pages(&dirty)
}arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool sgx_should_reclaim(unsigned long watermark) · line 399
Quoted 11 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +11
-0+/* sgx_dirty_page_list is thread-local to ksgxd, no need for a lock: */ +for (i =0 ; i <2 && !list_empty (&sgx_dirty_page_list); i++) { +while (!list_empty (&sgx_dirty_page_list)) { +if (kthread_should_stop ()) +return 0 ; + + page = list_first_entry(&sgx_dirty_page_list, struct sgx_epc_page, list); + + ret =__eremove (sgx_get_epc_virt_addr (page)); +if (!ret) { +/* The page is clean - move to the free list. */
I'd even say:
/* * page is now sanitized. Make it * available via the SGX page allocator: */
See what that does? It actually links the "cleaning" to the freeing.
Quoted 35 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +14
-5+list_del (&page->list); +sgx_free_epc_page (page); + }else { +/* The page is not yet clean - move to the dirty list. */ +list_move_tail (&page->list, &dirty); + } + +cond_resched (); + } -/* Should never happen. */ -if (!list_empty (&sgx_epc_sections[i].init_laundry_list)) -WARN (1 ,"EPC section %d has unsanitized pages.\n" , i); +list_splice (&dirty, &sgx_dirty_page_list); } +if (!list_empty (&sgx_dirty_page_list)) +WARN (1 ,"EPC section %d has unsanitized pages.\n" , i); +while (!kthread_should_stop ()) {if (try_to_freeze ())continue ;@@ -632,13 +626,12 @@ static bool __init sgx_setup_epc_section(u64 phys_addr, u64 size, section->phys_addr = phys_addr;spin_lock_init (§ion->lock);INIT_LIST_HEAD (§ion->page_list); -INIT_LIST_HEAD (§ion->init_laundry_list);for (i =0 ; i < nr_pages; i++) { section->pages[i].section = index; section->pages[i].flags =0 ; section->pages[i].owner =NULL ; -list_add_tail (§ion->pages[i].list, §ion->init_laundry_list); +list_add_tail (§ion->pages[i].list, &sgx_dirty_page_list); }
...
Jarkko Sakkinen
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 2/3] x86/sgx: Replace section local dirty page lists with a global list
Quoted 20 lines · Dave Hansen
Quoted 9 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Reset initialized EPC pages in
sgx_dirty_page_listto uninitialized state, and free them usingsgx_free_epc_page(). Do two passes, as for SECS pages the first round can fail, if all child pages have not yet been removed. The driver puts all pages on startup first tosgx_dirty_page_list, as the initialization could be triggered bykexec(), meaning that pages have been reserved for active enclaves before the operation.The section local lists are redundant, as
sgx_free_epc_page()figures out the correction by usingepc_page->section.During normal runtime, the "ksgxd" daemon behaves like a version of kswapd just for SGX. But, its first job is to initialize enclave memory. This is done in a a separate thread because this initialization can be quite slow.
Currently, the SGX boot code places each enclave page on a sgx_section-local list (
init_laundry_list). Once it starts up, the ksgxd code walks over that list and populates the actual SGX page allocator.
Quoted 6 lines
However, the per-section structures are going away to make way for the SGX NUMA allocator. There's also little need to have a per-section structure; the enclave pages are all treated identically, and they can be placed on the correct allocator list from metadata stoered in the enclave page itself.
Is this a suggestion how to rephrase the commit message? :-)
Quoted 58 lines
Quoted 58 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +6
-33@@ -27,39 +27,10 @@ static LIST_HEAD(sgx_active_page_list);static DEFINE_SPINLOCK (sgx_reclaimer_lock);/* -* Reset dirty EPC pages to uninitialized state. Laundry can be left with SECS -* pages whose child pages blocked EREMOVE. +* When the driver initialized, EPC pages go first here, as they could be +* initialized to an active enclave, on kexec entry. */ -static void sgx_sanitize_section (struct sgx_epc_section *section) -{ -struct sgx_epc_page *page; -LIST_HEAD (dirty); -int ret; - -/* init_laundry_list is thread-local, no need for a lock: */ -while (!list_empty (§ion->init_laundry_list)) { -if (kthread_should_stop ()) -return ; - -/* needed for access to ->page_list: */ -spin_lock (§ion->lock); - - page =list_first_entry (§ion->init_laundry_list, - struct sgx_epc_page, list); - - ret =__eremove (sgx_get_epc_virt_addr (page)); -if (!ret) -list_move (&page->list, §ion->page_list); -else -list_move_tail (&page->list, &dirty); - -spin_unlock (§ion->lock); - -cond_resched (); - } - -list_splice (&dirty, §ion->init_laundry_list); -} +static LIST_HEAD (sgx_dirty_page_list);static bool sgx_reclaimer_age (struct sgx_epc_page *epc_page) {@@ -400,25 +371,48 @@ static bool sgx_should_reclaim(unsigned long watermark)static int ksgxd (void *p) { -int i; +struct sgx_epc_page *page; +LIST_HEAD (dirty); +int i, ret;set_freezable ();
Quoted 7 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool sgx_should_reclaim(unsigned long watermark)
Quoted 5 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +2
-2/* -* Sanitize pages in order to recover from kexec(). The 2nd pass is -* required for SECS pages, whose child pages blocked EREMOVE. +* Reset initialized EPC pages in sgx_dirty_page_list to uninitialized state, +* and free them using sgx_free_epc_page(). I'm not a fan of comments that tell us verbatim what the code does.
So, what are you suggesting? Remove the whole comment or parts of it? I'm presuming that you suggest removing the "top-level" part.
Quoted 24 lines
Quoted 5 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +3
-0Do two passes, as for SECS pages the + * first round can fail, if all child pages have not yet been removed. The + * driver puts all pages on startup first to sgx_dirty_page_list, as the + * initialization could be triggered by kexec(), meaning that pages have beenarch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool sgx_should_reclaim(unsigned long watermark)
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +1
-4+* reserved for active enclaves before the operation. */ -for (i =0 ; i < sgx_nr_epc_sections; i++) -sgx_sanitize_section (&sgx_epc_sections[i]); -for (i =0 ; i < sgx_nr_epc_sections; i++) { -sgx_sanitize_section (&sgx_epc_sections[i]);FWIW, I don't like the removal of the helper here. I really like kernel threads' top-level function to be very understandable and clean. This makes it quite a bit harder to figure out what is going on.
For instance, we could just have a
sgx_sanitize_pages()which has a local dirty list and just calls:void
sgx_santitize_pages(void)
Quoted 8 lines
{
LIST_HEAD(dirty);
/*
* Comment about two passes
*/
__sgx_sanitize_pages(&dirty)
__sgx_sanitize_pages(&dirty)OK.
Quoted 15 lines
}
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool sgx_should_reclaim(unsigned long watermark) · line 399
Quoted 11 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +11
-0+/* sgx_dirty_page_list is thread-local to ksgxd, no need for a lock: */ +for (i =0 ; i <2 && !list_empty (&sgx_dirty_page_list); i++) { +while (!list_empty (&sgx_dirty_page_list)) { +if (kthread_should_stop ()) +return 0 ; + + page = list_first_entry(&sgx_dirty_page_list, struct sgx_epc_page, list); + + ret =__eremove (sgx_get_epc_virt_addr (page)); +if (!ret) { +/* The page is clean - move to the free list. */ I'd even say:
Quoted 6 lines
/* * page is now sanitized. Make it * available via the SGX page allocator: */See what that does? It actually links the "cleaning" to the freeing.
I agree, thanks.
Quoted 28 lines
Quoted 28 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +13
-4+list_del (&page->list); +sgx_free_epc_page (page); + }else { +/* The page is not yet clean - move to the dirty list. */ +list_move_tail (&page->list, &dirty); + } + +cond_resched (); + } -/* Should never happen. */ -if (!list_empty (&sgx_epc_sections[i].init_laundry_list)) -WARN (1 ,"EPC section %d has unsanitized pages.\n" , i); +list_splice (&dirty, &sgx_dirty_page_list); } +if (!list_empty (&sgx_dirty_page_list)) +WARN (1 ,"EPC section %d has unsanitized pages.\n" , i); +while (!kthread_should_stop ()) {if (try_to_freeze ())continue ;@@ -632,13 +626,12 @@ static bool __init sgx_setup_epc_section(u64 phys_addr, u64 size, section->phys_addr = phys_addr;spin_lock_init (§ion->lock);INIT_LIST_HEAD (§ion->page_list); -INIT_LIST_HEAD (§ion->init_laundry_list);
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 7 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +1
-1for (i =0 ; i < nr_pages; i++) { section->pages[i].section = index; section->pages[i].flags =0 ; section->pages[i].owner =NULL ; -list_add_tail (§ion->pages[i].list, §ion->init_laundry_list); +list_add_tail (§ion->pages[i].list, &sgx_dirty_page_list); }...
/Jarkko
Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] x86/sgx: Replace section local dirty page lists with a global list
Quoted 21 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Quoted 20 lines · Dave Hansen
Quoted 9 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Reset initialized EPC pages in
sgx_dirty_page_listto uninitialized state, and free them usingsgx_free_epc_page(). Do two passes, as for SECS pages the first round can fail, if all child pages have not yet been removed. The driver puts all pages on startup first tosgx_dirty_page_list, as the initialization could be triggered bykexec(), meaning that pages have been reserved for active enclaves before the operation.The section local lists are redundant, as
sgx_free_epc_page()figures out the correction by usingepc_page->section.During normal runtime, the "ksgxd" daemon behaves like a version of kswapd just for SGX. But, its first job is to initialize enclave memory. This is done in a a separate thread because this initialization can be quite slow.
Currently, the SGX boot code places each enclave page on a sgx_section-local list (
init_laundry_list). Once it starts up, the ksgxd code walks over that list and populates the actual SGX page allocator.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 6 lines
However, the per-section structures are going away to make way for the SGX NUMA allocator. There's also little need to have a per-section structure; the enclave pages are all treated identically, and they can be placed on the correct allocator list from metadata stoered in the enclave page itself.
Is this a suggestion how to rephrase the commit message? :-)
Yep.
Quoted 17 lines
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 9 lines
static int
ksgxd(void *p)
{arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +3
-1-int i; +struct sgx_epc_page *page; +LIST_HEAD (dirty); +int i, ret;set_freezable ();Quoted 7 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool sgx_should_reclaim(unsigned long watermark)
Quoted 5 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +2
-2/* -* Sanitize pages in order to recover from kexec(). The 2nd pass is -* required for SECS pages, whose child pages blocked EREMOVE. +* Reset initialized EPC pages in sgx_dirty_page_list to uninitialized state, +* and free them using sgx_free_epc_page(). I'm not a fan of comments that tell us verbatim what the code does.
Quoted 2 lines
So, what are you suggesting? Remove the whole comment or parts of it? I'm presuming that you suggest removing the "top-level" part.
Just please make it more relevant and informative. I can tell this is processing 'sgx_dirty_page_list' and calling sgx_free_epc_page() from the code. I don't need a comment to tell me that.
A better comment would say:
Take enclave pages from the init code, ensure they are clean, and free the back into the main SGX page allocator
That tells what *role* this code plays (connecting init code to the allocator) in a way that just verbatim telling what code is called does not.
Jarkko Sakkinen
maintainerPATCH v4 3/3 x86/sgx: Add a basic NUMA allocation scheme to sgx_alloc_epc_page()
In reply to Jarkko SakkinenBackground
==========
EPC section is covered by one or more SRAT entries that are associated with one and only one PXM (NUMA node). The motivation behind this patch is to provide basic elements of building allocation scheme based on this premise.
Just like normal RAM, enclave memory (EPC) should be covered by entries in the ACPI SRAT table. These entries allow each EPC section to be associated with a NUMA node.
Use this information to implement a simple NUMA-aware allocator for enclave memory.
Solution
========
Use phys_to_target_node() to associate each NUMA node with the EPC sections contained within its range. In sgx_alloc_epc_page(), first try to allocate from the NUMA node, where the CPU is executing. If that fails, allocate from other nodes, iterating them from the current node in order.
Other
=====
NUMA_KEEP_MEMINFO dependency is required for phys_to_target_node().
---
v4:
* Cycle nodes instead of a global page list, starting from the node of the current thread.
* Documented NUMA_KEEP_MEMINFO dependency to the commit message.
* Added NUMA node pointer to struct sgx_epc_section. EPC page should reference to a section, since potentially a node could have multiple sections (Intel SDM does not say anything explicit about this). This the safest play.
* Remove nodes_clear(sgx_numa_node_mask).
* Appended Dave's additions to the commit message for the background section.
arch/x86/Kconfig | 1 + arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c | 117 ++++++++++++++++++++------------- arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/sgx.h | 16 +++-- 3 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
arch/x86/Kconfig +1 -0
@@ -1930,6 +1930,7 @@ config X86_SGX depends on CRYPTO_SHA256=y select SRCU select MMU_NOTIFIER + select NUMA_KEEP_MEMINFO if NUMA help Intel(R) Software Guard eXtensions (SGX) is a set of CPU instructions that can be used by applications to set aside private regions of code
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +73 -44
203 lines not on this page · raw message
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/sgx.h +10 -6
@@ -29,22 +29,26 @@ struct sgx_epc_page {struct list_head list; }; +/* +* Contains the tracking data for NUMA nodes having EPC pages. Most importantly, +* the free page list local to the node is stored here. +*/ +struct sgx_numa_node { +struct list_head free_page_list; +spinlock_t lock; +}; +/* * The firmware can define multiple chunks of EPC to the different areas of the * physical memory e.g. for memory areas of the each node. This structure is * used to store EPC pages for one EPC section and virtual memory area where * the pages have been mapped. -* -* 'lock' must be held before accessing 'page_list' or 'free_cnt'. */ struct sgx_epc_section {unsigned long phys_addr;void *virt_addr;struct sgx_epc_page *pages; - -spinlock_t lock; -struct list_head page_list; -unsigned long free_cnt; +struct sgx_numa_node *node; };extern struct sgx_epc_section sgx_epc_sections[SGX_MAX_EPC_SECTIONS ];
Signature · 1 line
2.30.2
Jarkko Sakkinen
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 3/3] x86/sgx: Add a basic NUMA allocation scheme to sgx_alloc_epc_page()
Quoted 23 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Background
==========EPC section is covered by one or more SRAT entries that are associated with one and only one PXM (NUMA node). The motivation behind this patch is to provide basic elements of building allocation scheme based on this premise.
Just like normal RAM, enclave memory (EPC) should be covered by entries in the ACPI SRAT table. These entries allow each EPC section to be associated with a NUMA node.
Use this information to implement a simple NUMA-aware allocator for enclave memory.
Solution
========Use
phys_to_target_node()to associate each NUMA node with the EPC sections contained within its range. Insgx_alloc_epc_page(), first try to allocate from the NUMA node, where the CPU is executing. If that fails, allocate from other nodes, iterating them from the current node in order.
Quoted 7 lines
Other
=====
NUMA_KEEP_MEMINFOdependency is required forphys_to_target_node().
We *can* have also epc_page->node by:
- Considering the first section as the EPC of that node.
- Printing a warning if more sections hit the same node, and ignoring them.
- Merging sgx_numa_node and sgx_epc_section
I think this would be a decent idea. I think it's a sane assumption that a node has a single EPC section, but it's good to have that warning just in case.
I did not want to do this into this version because it's faster for me to refactor into this assumption than revert back.
/Jarkko
Quoted 287 lines
---
v4:
* Cycle nodes instead of a global page list, starting from the node of the current thread.
* DocumentedNUMA_KEEP_MEMINFOdependency to the commit message.
* Added NUMA node pointer to structsgx_epc_section. EPC page should reference to a section, since potentially a node could have multiple sections (Intel SDM does not say anything explicit about this). This the safest play.
* Removenodes_clear(sgx_numa_node_mask).
* Appended Dave's additions to the commit message for the background section.arch/x86/Kconfig | 1 + arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c | 117 ++++++++++++++++++++------------- arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/sgx.h | 16 +++-- 3 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)arch/x86/Kconfig +1
-0@@ -1930,6 +1930,7 @@ config X86_SGX depends on CRYPTO_SHA256=y select SRCU select MMU_NOTIFIER + select NUMA_KEEP_MEMINFO if NUMA help Intel(R) Software Guard eXtensions (SGX) is a set of CPU instructions that can be used by applications to set aside private regions of codearch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +73
-44@@ -18,14 +18,23 @@ static int sgx_nr_epc_sections;static struct task_struct *ksgxd_tsk;static DECLARE_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD (ksgxd_waitq); -/* -* These variables are part of the state of the reclaimer, and must be accessed -* with sgx_reclaimer_lock acquired. -*/ +/* The reclaimer lock protected variables prepend the lock. */ static LIST_HEAD (sgx_active_page_list); -static DEFINE_SPINLOCK (sgx_reclaimer_lock); +/* The free page list lock protected variables prepend the lock. */ +static unsigned long sgx_nr_free_pages; + +/* Nodes with one or more EPC sections. */ +static nodemask_t sgx_numa_mask; + +/* +* Array with one list_head for each possible NUMA node. Each +* list contains all the sgx_epc_section's which are on that +* node. +*/ +static struct sgx_numa_node *sgx_numa_nodes; +/* * When the driver initialized, EPC pages go first here, as they could be * initialized to an active enclave, on kexec entry. @@ -352,21 +361,9 @@ static void sgx_reclaim_pages(void) } } -static unsigned long sgx_nr_free_pages (void ) -{ -unsigned long cnt =0 ; -int i; - -for (i =0 ; i < sgx_nr_epc_sections; i++) - cnt += sgx_epc_sections[i].free_cnt; - -return cnt; -} -static bool sgx_should_reclaim (unsigned long watermark) { -return sgx_nr_free_pages () < watermark && - !list_empty (&sgx_active_page_list); +return sgx_nr_free_pages < watermark && !list_empty (&sgx_active_page_list); }static int ksgxd (void *p)@@ -443,50 +440,63 @@ static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void)return true; } -static struct sgx_epc_page *__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_section (struct sgx_epc_section *section) +static struct sgx_epc_page *__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_node (int nid) { -struct sgx_epc_page *page; +struct sgx_numa_node *node = &sgx_numa_nodes[nid]; +struct sgx_epc_page *page =NULL ; + +if (!node_isset (nid, sgx_numa_mask)) +return NULL ; -spin_lock (§ion->lock); +spin_lock (&node->lock); -if (list_empty (§ion->page_list)) { -spin_unlock (§ion->lock); +if (list_empty (&node->free_page_list)) { +spin_unlock (&node->lock);return NULL ; } - page = list_first_entry(§ion->page_list, struct sgx_epc_page, list); + page = list_first_entry(&node->free_page_list, struct sgx_epc_page, list);list_del_init (&page->list); - section->free_cnt--; + sgx_nr_free_pages--; + +spin_unlock (&node->lock); -spin_unlock (§ion->lock);return page; }/** * __sgx_alloc_epc_page() - Allocate an EPC page * -* Iterate through EPC sections and borrow a free EPC page to the caller. When a -* page is no longer needed it must be released with sgx_free_epc_page(). +* Iterate through NUMA nodes and borrow a free EPC page to the caller. When a +* page is no longer needed it must be released with sgx_free_epc_page(). Start +* from the NUMA node, where the caller is executing. * * Return: -* an EPC page, -* -errno on error +* - an EPC page: Free EPC pages were available. +* - ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM): Run out of EPC pages. */ struct sgx_epc_page *__sgx_alloc_epc_page (void ) { -struct sgx_epc_section *section;struct sgx_epc_page *page; -int i; +int nid =numa_node_id (); -for (i =0 ; i < sgx_nr_epc_sections; i++) { - section = &sgx_epc_sections[i]; +/* Try to allocate EPC from the current node, first: */ + page =__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_node (nid); +if (page) +return page; - page =__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_section (section); +/* Then, go through the other nodes: */ +while (true) { + nid =next_node_in (nid, sgx_numa_mask); +if (nid ==numa_node_id ()) +break ; + + page =__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_node (nid);if (page) -return page; +break ; } -return ERR_PTR (-ENOMEM ); +return page; }/** @@ -592,6 +602,7 @@ struct sgx_epc_page *sgx_alloc_epc_page(void *owner, bool reclaim)void sgx_free_epc_page (struct sgx_epc_page *page) {struct sgx_epc_section *section = &sgx_epc_sections[page->section]; +struct sgx_numa_node *node = section->node;int ret;WARN_ON_ONCE (page->flags &SGX_EPC_PAGE_RECLAIMER_TRACKED );@@ -600,10 +611,12 @@ void sgx_free_epc_page(struct sgx_epc_page *page)if (WARN_ONCE (ret,"EREMOVE returned %d (0x%x)" , ret, ret))return ; -spin_lock (§ion->lock); -list_add_tail (&page->list, §ion->page_list); - section->free_cnt++; -spin_unlock (§ion->lock); +spin_lock (&node->lock); + +list_add_tail (&page->list, &node->free_page_list); + sgx_nr_free_pages++; + +spin_unlock (&node->lock); } static bool __init sgx_setup_epc_section(u64 phys_addr, u64 size,@@ -624,8 +637,6 @@ static bool __init sgx_setup_epc_section(u64 phys_addr, u64 size, } section->phys_addr = phys_addr; -spin_lock_init (§ion->lock); -INIT_LIST_HEAD (§ion->page_list);for (i =0 ; i < nr_pages; i++) { section->pages[i].section = index;@@ -634,7 +645,7 @@ static bool __init sgx_setup_epc_section(u64 phys_addr, u64 size,list_add_tail (§ion->pages[i].list, &sgx_dirty_page_list); } - section->free_cnt = nr_pages; + sgx_nr_free_pages += nr_pages;return true; }@@ -653,8 +664,11 @@ static bool __init sgx_page_cache_init(void) {u32 eax, ebx, ecx, edx, type;u64 pa, size; +int nid;int i; + sgx_numa_nodes =kmalloc_array (num_possible_nodes (),sizeof (*sgx_numa_nodes),GFP_KERNEL ); +for (i =0 ; i <ARRAY_SIZE (sgx_epc_sections); i++) {cpuid_count (SGX_CPUID , i +SGX_CPUID_EPC , &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);@@ -677,6 +691,21 @@ static bool __init sgx_page_cache_init(void)break ; } + nid =numa_map_to_online_node (phys_to_target_node (pa)); +if (nid ==NUMA_NO_NODE ) { +/* The physical address is already printed above. */ +pr_warn (FW_BUG "Unable to map EPC section to online node. Fallback to the NUMA node 0.\n" ); + nid =0 ; + } + +if (!node_isset (nid, sgx_numa_mask)) { +spin_lock_init (&sgx_numa_nodes[nid].lock); +INIT_LIST_HEAD (&sgx_numa_nodes[nid].free_page_list); +node_set (nid, sgx_numa_mask); + } + + sgx_epc_sections[i].node = &sgx_numa_nodes[nid]; + sgx_nr_epc_sections++; }arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/sgx.h +10
-6@@ -29,22 +29,26 @@ struct sgx_epc_page {struct list_head list; }; +/* +* Contains the tracking data for NUMA nodes having EPC pages. Most importantly, +* the free page list local to the node is stored here. +*/ +struct sgx_numa_node { +struct list_head free_page_list; +spinlock_t lock; +}; +/* * The firmware can define multiple chunks of EPC to the different areas of the * physical memory e.g. for memory areas of the each node. This structure is * used to store EPC pages for one EPC section and virtual memory area where * the pages have been mapped. -* -* 'lock' must be held before accessing 'page_list' or 'free_cnt'. */ struct sgx_epc_section {unsigned long phys_addr;void *virt_addr;struct sgx_epc_page *pages; - -spinlock_t lock; -struct list_head page_list; -unsigned long free_cnt; +struct sgx_numa_node *node; };extern struct sgx_epc_section sgx_epc_sections[SGX_MAX_EPC_SECTIONS ];Signature · 1 line
2.30.2
Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] x86/sgx: Add a basic NUMA allocation scheme to sgx_alloc_epc_page()
In reply to Jarkko SakkinenQuoted 6 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Background
==========EPC section is covered by one or more SRAT entries that are associated with one and only one PXM (NUMA node). The motivation behind this patch is to provide basic elements of building allocation scheme based on this premise.
A better set of background information here would also remind folks what an 'EPC section' is.
Quoted 6 lines
Just like normal RAM, enclave memory (EPC) should be covered by entries in the ACPI SRAT table. These entries allow each EPC section to be associated with a NUMA node.
Use this information to implement a simple NUMA-aware allocator for enclave memory.
SGX enclave memory is enumerated by the processor in contiguous physical ranges called "EPC sections". Currently, there is a free list per section, but allocations simply target the lowest-numbered sections. This is functional, but has no NUMA awareness.
Fortunately, EPC sections are covered by entries in the ACPI SRAT table.
These entries allow each EPC section to be associated with a NUMA node,
just like normal RAM.
Quoted 8 lines
Solution
========Use
phys_to_target_node()to associate each NUMA node with the EPC sections contained within its range. Insgx_alloc_epc_page(), first try to allocate from the NUMA node, where the CPU is executing. If that fails, allocate from other nodes, iterating them from the current node in order.
To me, this is just telling us what the code does. It's not very useful. I'd say:
Implement a NUMA-aware enclave page allocator. Mirror the buddy allocator and maintain a list of enclave pages for each NUMA node. Attempt to allocate enclave memory first from local nodes, then fall back to other nodes.
Note that the fallback is not as sophisticated as the buddy allocator and is itself not aware of NUMA distances. When a node's free list is empty, it searches for the next-highest node with enclave pages (and will wrap if necessary). This could be improved in the future.
Quoted 4 lines
Other
=====
NUMA_KEEP_MEMINFOdependency is required forphys_to_target_node().
Reading the changelog, it's not obvious that you're talking about a Kconfig variable here.
I was also thinking, this says:
# Keep arch NUMA mapping infrastructure post-init. config NUMA_KEEP_MEMINFO
bool
But we only need it during SGX init. Could you explain a bit why it's needed here specifically? Superficially it seems like we only need this info *during* init.
Quoted 71 lines
arch/x86/Kconfig +1
-0@@ -1930,6 +1930,7 @@ config X86_SGX depends on CRYPTO_SHA256=y select SRCU select MMU_NOTIFIER + select NUMA_KEEP_MEMINFO if NUMA help Intel(R) Software Guard eXtensions (SGX) is a set of CPU instructions that can be used by applications to set aside private regions of codearch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +15
-18@@ -18,14 +18,23 @@ static int sgx_nr_epc_sections;static struct task_struct *ksgxd_tsk;static DECLARE_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD (ksgxd_waitq); -/* -* These variables are part of the state of the reclaimer, and must be accessed -* with sgx_reclaimer_lock acquired. -*/ +/* The reclaimer lock protected variables prepend the lock. */ static LIST_HEAD (sgx_active_page_list); -static DEFINE_SPINLOCK (sgx_reclaimer_lock); +/* The free page list lock protected variables prepend the lock. */ +static unsigned long sgx_nr_free_pages; + +/* Nodes with one or more EPC sections. */ +static nodemask_t sgx_numa_mask; + +/* +* Array with one list_head for each possible NUMA node. Each +* list contains all the sgx_epc_section's which are on that +* node. +*/ +static struct sgx_numa_node *sgx_numa_nodes; +/* * When the driver initialized, EPC pages go first here, as they could be * initialized to an active enclave, on kexec entry. @@ -352,21 +361,9 @@ static void sgx_reclaim_pages(void) } } -static unsigned long sgx_nr_free_pages (void ) -{ -unsigned long cnt =0 ; -int i; - -for (i =0 ; i < sgx_nr_epc_sections; i++) - cnt += sgx_epc_sections[i].free_cnt; - -return cnt; -} -static bool sgx_should_reclaim (unsigned long watermark) { -return sgx_nr_free_pages () < watermark && - !list_empty (&sgx_active_page_list); +return sgx_nr_free_pages < watermark && !list_empty (&sgx_active_page_list); }static int ksgxd (void *p)@@ -443,50 +440,63 @@ static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void)return true; }
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void) · line 449
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +6
-2-static struct sgx_epc_page *__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_section (struct sgx_epc_section *section) +static struct sgx_epc_page *__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_node (int nid) { -struct sgx_epc_page *page; +struct sgx_numa_node *node = &sgx_numa_nodes[nid]; +struct sgx_epc_page *page =NULL ; + +if (!node_isset (nid, sgx_numa_mask)) +return NULL ;
I don't think this mask check is super necessary. It won't ever trigger for the "fallback" path. For the node-local allocation, I guess it saves a cacheline (node->free_page_list).
Quoted 18 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +7
-5-spin_lock (§ion->lock); +spin_lock (&node->lock); -if (list_empty (§ion->page_list)) { -spin_unlock (§ion->lock); +if (list_empty (&node->free_page_list)) { +spin_unlock (&node->lock);return NULL ; } - page = list_first_entry(§ion->page_list, struct sgx_epc_page, list); + page = list_first_entry(&node->free_page_list, struct sgx_epc_page, list);list_del_init (&page->list); - section->free_cnt--; + sgx_nr_free_pages--; + +spin_unlock (&node->lock);
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void) · line 470
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +1
-3-spin_unlock (§ion->lock);return page; }/** * __sgx_alloc_epc_page() - Allocate an EPC page * -* Iterate through EPC sections and borrow a free EPC page to the caller. When a -* page is no longer needed it must be released with sgx_free_epc_page(). +* Iterate through NUMA nodes and borrow a free EPC page to the caller. When a
"borrow" is a weird word to use here.
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void) · line 472
Quoted 2 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +2
-0+* page is no longer needed it must be released with sgx_free_epc_page(). Start +* from the NUMA node, where the caller is executing.
I don't think we need to tell folks how allocators work: that "free" and "alloc" are opposites.
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void) · line 477
Quoted 6 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +2
-2* Return: -* an EPC page, -* -errno on error +* - an EPC page: Free EPC pages were available. +* - ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM): Run out of EPC pages. */
I think returning NULL from a allocator is probably OK. Folks understand that NULL means ENOMEM.
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +2
-4struct sgx_epc_page *__sgx_alloc_epc_page (void ) { -struct sgx_epc_section *section;struct sgx_epc_page *page; -int i; +int nid =numa_node_id (); -for (i =0 ; i < sgx_nr_epc_sections; i++) { - section = &sgx_epc_sections[i]; +/* Try to allocate EPC from the current node, first: */
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void) · line 492
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +8
-1+ page =__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_node (nid); +if (page) +return page; - page =__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_section (section); +/* Then, go through the other nodes: */ +while (true) { + nid =next_node_in (nid, sgx_numa_mask); +if (nid ==numa_node_id ()) +break ;
One nit: This can _theoretically_ livelock. Preemption is enabled here and numa_node_id() can change. It's theoretically possible that numa_node_id()!=nid forever.
The way to prevent this is to read numa_node_id() once and then compare 'nid' against that single read.
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void) · line 500
Quoted 9 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +3
-2+ page =__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_node (nid);if (page) -return page; +break ; } -return ERR_PTR (-ENOMEM ); +return page; }
I guess you probably wrote it this way because you prefer it. But, this can be written with a single call to __sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_node().
Quoted 45 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +8
-7/** @@ -592,6 +602,7 @@ struct sgx_epc_page *sgx_alloc_epc_page(void *owner, bool reclaim)void sgx_free_epc_page (struct sgx_epc_page *page) {struct sgx_epc_section *section = &sgx_epc_sections[page->section]; +struct sgx_numa_node *node = section->node;int ret;WARN_ON_ONCE (page->flags &SGX_EPC_PAGE_RECLAIMER_TRACKED );@@ -600,10 +611,12 @@ void sgx_free_epc_page(struct sgx_epc_page *page)if (WARN_ONCE (ret,"EREMOVE returned %d (0x%x)" , ret, ret))return ; -spin_lock (§ion->lock); -list_add_tail (&page->list, §ion->page_list); - section->free_cnt++; -spin_unlock (§ion->lock); +spin_lock (&node->lock); + +list_add_tail (&page->list, &node->free_page_list); + sgx_nr_free_pages++; + +spin_unlock (&node->lock); } static bool __init sgx_setup_epc_section(u64 phys_addr, u64 size,@@ -624,8 +637,6 @@ static bool __init sgx_setup_epc_section(u64 phys_addr, u64 size, } section->phys_addr = phys_addr; -spin_lock_init (§ion->lock); -INIT_LIST_HEAD (§ion->page_list);for (i =0 ; i < nr_pages; i++) { section->pages[i].section = index;@@ -634,7 +645,7 @@ static bool __init sgx_setup_epc_section(u64 phys_addr, u64 size,list_add_tail (§ion->pages[i].list, &sgx_dirty_page_list); } - section->free_cnt = nr_pages; + sgx_nr_free_pages += nr_pages;return true; }
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_cache_init(void) · line 670
Quoted 7 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +2
-0@@ -653,8 +664,11 @@ static bool __init sgx_page_cache_init(void) {u32 eax, ebx, ecx, edx, type;u64 pa, size; +int nid;int i; + sgx_numa_nodes =kmalloc_array (num_possible_nodes (),sizeof (*sgx_numa_nodes),GFP_KERNEL );
Needs a NULL check.
Quoted 14 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +7
-0for (i =0 ; i <ARRAY_SIZE (sgx_epc_sections); i++) {cpuid_count (SGX_CPUID , i +SGX_CPUID_EPC , &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);@@ -677,6 +691,21 @@ static bool __init sgx_page_cache_init(void)break ; } + nid =numa_map_to_online_node (phys_to_target_node (pa)); +if (nid ==NUMA_NO_NODE ) { +/* The physical address is already printed above. */ +pr_warn (FW_BUG "Unable to map EPC section to online node. Fallback to the NUMA node 0.\n" ); + nid =0 ; + } +
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_cache_init(void) · line 710
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +8
-0+if (!node_isset (nid, sgx_numa_mask)) { +spin_lock_init (&sgx_numa_nodes[nid].lock); +INIT_LIST_HEAD (&sgx_numa_nodes[nid].free_page_list); +node_set (nid, sgx_numa_mask); + } + + sgx_epc_sections[i].node = &sgx_numa_nodes[nid]; + sgx_nr_epc_sections++; }
The rest looks OK.
Jarkko Sakkinen
maintainerRe: [PATCH v4 3/3] x86/sgx: Add a basic NUMA allocation scheme to sgx_alloc_epc_page()
Quoted 10 lines · Dave Hansen
Quoted 6 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Background
==========EPC section is covered by one or more SRAT entries that are associated with one and only one PXM (NUMA node). The motivation behind this patch is to provide basic elements of building allocation scheme based on this premise.
A better set of background information here would also remind folks what an 'EPC section' is.
I don't actually know what exactly they are, because SDM's definition is not very rigorous ;-)
I.e. it is not too precise between NUMA node and section relationship.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 7 lines
Just like normal RAM, enclave memory (EPC) should be covered by entries in the ACPI SRAT table. These entries allow each EPC section to be associated with a NUMA node.
Use this information to implement a simple NUMA-aware allocator for enclave memory.
Quoted 8 lines
SGX enclave memory is enumerated by the processor in contiguous physical ranges called "EPC sections". Currently, there is a free list per section, but allocations simply target the lowest-numbered sections. This is functional, but has no NUMA awareness.
Fortunately, EPC sections are covered by entries in the ACPI SRAT table.
These entries allow each EPC section to be associated with a NUMA node,
just like normal RAM.
Thanks!
Quoted 17 lines
Quoted 8 lines
Solution
========Use
phys_to_target_node()to associate each NUMA node with the EPC sections contained within its range. Insgx_alloc_epc_page(), first try to allocate from the NUMA node, where the CPU is executing. If that fails, allocate from other nodes, iterating them from the current node in order.To me, this is just telling us what the code does. It's not very useful. I'd say:
Implement a NUMA-aware enclave page allocator. Mirror the buddy allocator and maintain a list of enclave pages for each NUMA node. Attempt to allocate enclave memory first from local nodes, then fall back to other nodes.
Quoted 4 lines
Note that the fallback is not as sophisticated as the buddy allocator and is itself not aware of NUMA distances. When a node's free list is empty, it searches for the next-highest node with enclave pages (and will wrap if necessary). This could be improved in the future.
Thanks.
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Other
=====
NUMA_KEEP_MEMINFOdependency is required forphys_to_target_node().Reading the changelog, it's not obvious that you're talking about a
Kconfigvariable here.I was also thinking, this says:
Quoted 7 lines
# Keep arch NUMA mapping infrastructure post-init. config
NUMA_KEEP_MEMINFO
boolBut we only need it during SGX init. Could you explain a bit why it's needed here specifically? Superficially it seems like we only need this info *during* init.
Well, numa_meminfo is a static variable of mm/numa.c, so we cannot directly access it. And phys_to_numa_node(), which accesses its data, does not exist, unless NUMA_KEEP_MEMINFO is defined.
So, yes, theoretically we could pull the data withotu NUMA_KEEP_MEMINFO, but thise would require to numa_meminfo a global variable.
We do not care about post-init part, in that sense you are right.
Quoted 226 lines
Quoted 72 lines
arch/x86/Kconfig +1
-0@@ -1930,6 +1930,7 @@ config X86_SGX depends on CRYPTO_SHA256=y select SRCU select MMU_NOTIFIER + select NUMA_KEEP_MEMINFO if NUMA help Intel(R) Software Guard eXtensions (SGX) is a set of CPU instructions that can be used by applications to set aside private regions of codearch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +15
-18@@ -18,14 +18,23 @@ static int sgx_nr_epc_sections;static struct task_struct *ksgxd_tsk;static DECLARE_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD (ksgxd_waitq); -/* -* These variables are part of the state of the reclaimer, and must be accessed -* with sgx_reclaimer_lock acquired. -*/ +/* The reclaimer lock protected variables prepend the lock. */ static LIST_HEAD (sgx_active_page_list); -static DEFINE_SPINLOCK (sgx_reclaimer_lock); +/* The free page list lock protected variables prepend the lock. */ +static unsigned long sgx_nr_free_pages; + +/* Nodes with one or more EPC sections. */ +static nodemask_t sgx_numa_mask; + +/* +* Array with one list_head for each possible NUMA node. Each +* list contains all the sgx_epc_section's which are on that +* node. +*/ +static struct sgx_numa_node *sgx_numa_nodes; +/* * When the driver initialized, EPC pages go first here, as they could be * initialized to an active enclave, on kexec entry. @@ -352,21 +361,9 @@ static void sgx_reclaim_pages(void) } } -static unsigned long sgx_nr_free_pages (void ) -{ -unsigned long cnt =0 ; -int i; - -for (i =0 ; i < sgx_nr_epc_sections; i++) - cnt += sgx_epc_sections[i].free_cnt; - -return cnt; -} -static bool sgx_should_reclaim (unsigned long watermark) { -return sgx_nr_free_pages () < watermark && - !list_empty (&sgx_active_page_list); +return sgx_nr_free_pages < watermark && !list_empty (&sgx_active_page_list); }static int ksgxd (void *p)@@ -443,50 +440,63 @@ static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void)return true; }arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void) · line 449
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +6
-2-static struct sgx_epc_page *__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_section (struct sgx_epc_section *section) +static struct sgx_epc_page *__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_node (int nid) { -struct sgx_epc_page *page; +struct sgx_numa_node *node = &sgx_numa_nodes[nid]; +struct sgx_epc_page *page =NULL ; + +if (!node_isset (nid, sgx_numa_mask)) +return NULL ;I don't think this mask check is super necessary. It won't ever trigger for the "fallback" path. For the node-local allocation, I guess it saves a cacheline (
node->free_page_list).Quoted 18 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +7
-5-spin_lock (§ion->lock); +spin_lock (&node->lock); -if (list_empty (§ion->page_list)) { -spin_unlock (§ion->lock); +if (list_empty (&node->free_page_list)) { +spin_unlock (&node->lock);return NULL ; } - page = list_first_entry(§ion->page_list, struct sgx_epc_page, list); + page = list_first_entry(&node->free_page_list, struct sgx_epc_page, list);list_del_init (&page->list); - section->free_cnt--; + sgx_nr_free_pages--; + +spin_unlock (&node->lock);arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void) · line 470
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +1
-3-spin_unlock (§ion->lock);return page; }/** * __sgx_alloc_epc_page() - Allocate an EPC page * -* Iterate through EPC sections and borrow a free EPC page to the caller. When a -* page is no longer needed it must be released with sgx_free_epc_page(). +* Iterate through NUMA nodes and borrow a free EPC page to the caller. When a "borrow" is a weird word to use here.
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void) · line 472
Quoted 2 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +2
-0+* page is no longer needed it must be released with sgx_free_epc_page(). Start +* from the NUMA node, where the caller is executing. I don't think we need to tell folks how allocators work: that "free" and "alloc" are opposites.
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void) · line 477
Quoted 6 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +2
-2* Return: -* an EPC page, -* -errno on error +* - an EPC page: Free EPC pages were available. +* - ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM): Run out of EPC pages. */ I think returning NULL from a allocator is probably OK. Folks understand that NULL means ENOMEM.
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +2
-4struct sgx_epc_page *__sgx_alloc_epc_page (void ) { -struct sgx_epc_section *section;struct sgx_epc_page *page; -int i; +int nid =numa_node_id (); -for (i =0 ; i < sgx_nr_epc_sections; i++) { - section = &sgx_epc_sections[i]; +/* Try to allocate EPC from the current node, first: */ arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void) · line 492
Quoted 10 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +8
-1+ page =__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_node (nid); +if (page) +return page; - page =__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_section (section); +/* Then, go through the other nodes: */ +while (true) { + nid =next_node_in (nid, sgx_numa_mask); +if (nid ==numa_node_id ()) +break ;One nit: This can _theoretically_ livelock. Preemption is enabled here and
numa_node_id()can change. It's theoretically possible that numa_node_id()!=nid forever.The way to prevent this is to read
numa_node_id()once and then compare 'nid' against that single read.arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_reclaimer_init(void) · line 500
Quoted 9 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +3
-2+ page =__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_node (nid);if (page) -return page; +break ; } -return ERR_PTR (-ENOMEM ); +return page; }I guess you probably wrote it this way because you prefer it. But, this can be written with a single call to
__sgx_alloc_epc_page_from_node().Quoted 51 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +9
-7/** @@ -592,6 +602,7 @@ struct sgx_epc_page *sgx_alloc_epc_page(void *owner, bool reclaim)void sgx_free_epc_page (struct sgx_epc_page *page) {struct sgx_epc_section *section = &sgx_epc_sections[page->section]; +struct sgx_numa_node *node = section->node;int ret;WARN_ON_ONCE (page->flags &SGX_EPC_PAGE_RECLAIMER_TRACKED );@@ -600,10 +611,12 @@ void sgx_free_epc_page(struct sgx_epc_page *page)if (WARN_ONCE (ret,"EREMOVE returned %d (0x%x)" , ret, ret))return ; -spin_lock (§ion->lock); -list_add_tail (&page->list, §ion->page_list); - section->free_cnt++; -spin_unlock (§ion->lock); +spin_lock (&node->lock); + +list_add_tail (&page->list, &node->free_page_list); + sgx_nr_free_pages++; + +spin_unlock (&node->lock); } static bool __init sgx_setup_epc_section(u64 phys_addr, u64 size,@@ -624,8 +637,6 @@ static bool __init sgx_setup_epc_section(u64 phys_addr, u64 size, } section->phys_addr = phys_addr; -spin_lock_init (§ion->lock); -INIT_LIST_HEAD (§ion->page_list);for (i =0 ; i < nr_pages; i++) { section->pages[i].section = index;@@ -634,7 +645,7 @@ static bool __init sgx_setup_epc_section(u64 phys_addr, u64 size,list_add_tail (§ion->pages[i].list, &sgx_dirty_page_list); } - section->free_cnt = nr_pages; + sgx_nr_free_pages += nr_pages;return true; }@@ -653,8 +664,11 @@ static bool __init sgx_page_cache_init(void) {u32 eax, ebx, ecx, edx, type;u64 pa, size; +int nid;int i;
Quoted 3 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_cache_init(void) · line 670
Quoted 1 line
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +1
-0+ sgx_numa_nodes =kmalloc_array (num_possible_nodes (),sizeof (*sgx_numa_nodes),GFP_KERNEL );Needs a NULL check.
Ugh, lol, I did spot this but forgot to fix it. Darn, well, I'll fix it for the next version :-)
Quoted 19 lines
Quoted 19 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +11
-0for (i =0 ; i <ARRAY_SIZE (sgx_epc_sections); i++) {cpuid_count (SGX_CPUID , i +SGX_CPUID_EPC , &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);@@ -677,6 +691,21 @@ static bool __init sgx_page_cache_init(void)break ; } + nid =numa_map_to_online_node (phys_to_target_node (pa)); +if (nid ==NUMA_NO_NODE ) { +/* The physical address is already printed above. */ +pr_warn (FW_BUG "Unable to map EPC section to online node. Fallback to the NUMA node 0.\n" ); + nid =0 ; + } + +if (!node_isset (nid, sgx_numa_mask)) { +spin_lock_init (&sgx_numa_nodes[nid].lock); +INIT_LIST_HEAD (&sgx_numa_nodes[nid].free_page_list); +node_set (nid, sgx_numa_mask);
Quoted 9 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c static bool __init sgx_page_cache_init(void) · line 710
Quoted 6 lines
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c +4
-0+ } + + sgx_epc_sections[i].node = &sgx_numa_nodes[nid]; + sgx_nr_epc_sections++; }The rest looks OK.
/Jarkko