Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 26 Nov 2019 17:48:40 +0100
From:   Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
Cc:     Matthias Maennich <maennich@google.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] export.h: reduce __ksymtab_strings string duplication
 by using "MS" section flags
Message-ID: <20191126164840.GA8011@linux-8ccs>
References: <20191120145110.8397-1-jeyu@kernel.org>
 <20191125154217.18640-1-jeyu@kernel.org>
 <CAK7LNASU9YysYNXuBKSU4WeUyE=2itfLDYzCupXL-49GUZuGnQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191126135620.GA38845@google.com>
 <20191126153153.GA3495@linux-8ccs>
 <CAK7LNAS9WoqJh2NR81QrYNGVAUhbgU0Y97791HYb1XeAuHCtWw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAK7LNAS9WoqJh2NR81QrYNGVAUhbgU0Y97791HYb1XeAuHCtWw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

+++ Masahiro Yamada [27/11/19 01:12 +0900]:
>On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 12:32 AM Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> +++ Matthias Maennich [26/11/19 13:56 +0000]:
>> >On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 05:32:59PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>> >>On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 12:42 AM Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>Commit c3a6cf19e695 ("export: avoid code duplication in
>> >>>include/linux/export.h") refactors export.h quite nicely, but introduces
>> >>>a slight increase in memory usage due to using the empty string ""
>> >>>instead of NULL to indicate that an exported symbol has no namespace. As
>> >>>mentioned in that commit, this meant an increase of 1 byte per exported
>> >>>symbol without a namespace. For example, if a kernel configuration has
>> >>>about 10k exported symbols, this would mean that the size of
>> >>>__ksymtab_strings would increase by roughly 10kB.
>> >>>
>> >>>We can alleviate this situation by utilizing the SHF_MERGE and
>> >>>SHF_STRING section flags. SHF_MERGE|SHF_STRING indicate to the linker
>> >>>that the data in the section are null-terminated strings that can be
>> >>>merged to eliminate duplication. More specifically, from the binutils
>> >>>documentation - "for sections with both M and S, a string which is a
>> >>>suffix of a larger string is considered a duplicate. Thus "def" will be
>> >>>merged with "abcdef"; A reference to the first "def" will be changed to
>> >>>a reference to "abcdef"+3". Thus, all the empty strings would be merged
>> >>>as well as any strings that can be merged according to the cited method
>> >>>above. For example, "memset" and "__memset" would be merged to just
>> >>>"__memset" in __ksymtab_strings.
>> >>>
>> >>>As of v5.4-rc5, the following statistics were gathered with x86
>> >>>defconfig with approximately 10.7k exported symbols.
>> >>>
>> >>>Size of __ksymtab_strings in vmlinux:
>> >>>-------------------------------------
>> >>>v5.4-rc5: 213834 bytes
>> >>>v5.4-rc5 with commit c3a6cf19e695: 224455 bytes
>> >>>v5.4-rc5 with this patch: 205759 bytes
>> >>>
>> >>>So, we already see memory savings of ~8kB compared to vanilla -rc5 and
>> >>>savings of nearly 18.7kB compared to -rc5 with commit c3a6cf19e695 on top.
>> >>>
>> >>>Unfortunately, as of this writing, strings will not get deduplicated for
>> >>>kernel modules, as ld does not do the deduplication for
>> >>>SHF_MERGE|SHF_STRINGS sections for relocatable files (ld -r), which
>> >>>kernel modules are. A patch for ld is currently being worked on to
>> >>>hopefully allow for string deduplication in relocatable files in the
>> >>>future.
>> >>>
>> >
>> >Thanks for working on this!
>> >
>> >>>Suggested-by: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
>> >>>Signed-off-by: Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>
>> >>>---
>> >>>
>> >>>v2: use %progbits throughout and document the oddity in a comment.
>> >>>
>> >>> include/asm-generic/export.h |  8 +++++---
>> >>> include/linux/export.h       | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++------
>> >>> 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>> >>>
>> >>>diff --git a/include/asm-generic/export.h b/include/asm-generic/export.h
>> >>>index fa577978fbbd..23bc98e97a66 100644
>> >>>--- a/include/asm-generic/export.h
>> >>>+++ b/include/asm-generic/export.h
>> >>>@@ -26,9 +26,11 @@
>> >>> .endm
>> >>>
>> >>> /*
>> >>>- * note on .section use: @progbits vs %progbits nastiness doesn't matter,
>> >>>- * since we immediately emit into those sections anyway.
>> >>>+ * note on .section use: we specify progbits since usage of the "M" (SHF_MERGE)
>> >>>+ * section flag requires it. Use '%progbits' instead of '@progbits' since the
>> >>>+ * former apparently works on all arches according to the binutils source.
>> >>>  */
>> >>>+
>> >>> .macro ___EXPORT_SYMBOL name,val,sec
>> >>> #ifdef CONFIG_MODULES
>> >>>        .globl __ksymtab_\name
>> >>>@@ -37,7 +39,7 @@
>> >>> __ksymtab_\name:
>> >>>        __put \val, __kstrtab_\name
>> >>>        .previous
>> >>>-       .section __ksymtab_strings,"a"
>> >>>+       .section __ksymtab_strings,"aMS",%progbits,1
>> >>> __kstrtab_\name:
>> >>>        .asciz "\name"
>> >>>        .previous
>> >>>diff --git a/include/linux/export.h b/include/linux/export.h
>> >>>index 201262793369..3d835ca34d33 100644
>> >>>--- a/include/linux/export.h
>> >>>+++ b/include/linux/export.h
>> >>>@@ -81,16 +81,31 @@ struct kernel_symbol {
>> >>>
>> >>> #else
>> >>>
>> >>>+/*
>> >>>+ * note on .section use: we specify progbits since usage of the "M" (SHF_MERGE)
>> >>>+ * section flag requires it. Use '%progbits' instead of '@progbits' since the
>> >>>+ * former apparently works on all arches according to the binutils source.
>> >>>+ */
>> >>>+#define __KSTRTAB_ENTRY(sym)                                                   \
>> >>>+       asm("   .section \"__ksymtab_strings\",\"aMS\",%progbits,1      \n"     \
>> >>>+           "__kstrtab_" #sym ":                                        \n"     \
>> >>>+           "   .asciz  \"" #sym "\"                                    \n"     \
>> >>>+           "   .previous                                               \n")
>> >>>+
>> >>>+#define __KSTRTAB_NS_ENTRY(sym, ns)                                            \
>> >>>+       asm("   .section \"__ksymtab_strings\",\"aMS\",%progbits,1      \n"     \
>> >>>+           "__kstrtabns_" #sym ":                                      \n"     \
>> >>>+           "   .asciz  " #ns "                                         \n"     \
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Hmm, it took some time for me to how this code works.
>> >>
>> >>ns is already a C string, then you added # to it,
>> >>then I was confused.
>> >>
>> >>Personally, I prefer this code:
>> >>" .asciz \"" ns "\" \n"
>> >>
>> >>so it looks in the same way as __KSTRTAB_ENTRY().
>> >
>> >I agree with this, these entries should be consistent.
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>BTW, you duplicated \"aMS\",%progbits,1" and ".previous"
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>I would write it shorter, like this:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>#define ___EXPORT_SYMBOL(sym, sec, ns) \
>> >>       extern typeof(sym) sym; \
>> >>       extern const char __kstrtab_##sym[]; \
>> >>       extern const char __kstrtabns_##sym[]; \
>> >>       __CRC_SYMBOL(sym, sec); \
>> >>       asm("    .section \"__ksymtab_strings\",\"aMS\",%progbits,1\n" \
>> >>           "__kstrtab_" #sym ": \n" \
>> >>           "     .asciz \"" #sym "\" \n" \
>> >>           "__kstrtabns_" #sym ": \n" \
>> >>           "     .asciz \"" ns "\" \n" \
>> >>           "     .previous \n");    \
>> >>      __KSYMTAB_ENTRY(sym, sec)
>> >>
>> >
>> >I would prefer the separate macros though (as initially proposed) as I
>> >find them much more readable. The code is already a bit tricky to reason
>> >about and I don't think the shorter version is enough of a gain.
>>
>> Yeah, the macros were more readable IMO. But I could just squash them into one
>> __KSTRTAB_ENTRY macro as a compromise for Masahiro maybe?
>>
>> Is this any better?
>
>I prefer opposite.
>
>
>__CRC_SYMBOL() is macrofied because it is ifdef'ed by
>CONFIG_MODVERSIONS and CONFIG_MOD_REL_CRCS.
>
>__KSYMTAB_ENTRY() is macrofied because it is ifdef'ed by
>CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PREL32_RELOCATIONS.
>
>
>
>__KSTRTAB_ENTRY() does not depend on any CONFIG option,
>so it can be expanded in ___EXPORT_SYMBOL().
>
>
>You need to check multiple locations
>to understand how it works as a whole.
>I do not understand why increasing macro-chains is readable.

I think it is "readable" in the sense that when someone is reading
export.h for the first time, they know exactly what ___EXPORT_SYMBOL()
is supposed to do, without requiring them to read too deeply into the
asm and swim through the #ifdefs.  __CRC_SYMBOL(), depending on
modversions, creates an entry in what would eventually be merged to
become the __kcrctab section, __KSTRTAB_ENTRY() creates entries in
__ksymtab_strings, and __KSYMTAB_ENTRY() creates an entry in (what
would eventually become) the __ksymtab{,_gpl} section. It gives a
general idea of what it's doing.

However, I do understand your reasoning behind not having an extra
macro. I'll wait a bit before respinning the patch to see if we can
get at a consensus..