On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:40 PM, Andrew Morton
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 20:29:07 +0200 Andrey Konovalov [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

Slab memory usage after boot [2]:
* ~40 kb for clean kernel
* ~105 kb + 1/8th shadow ~= 118 kb for KASAN
* ~47 kb + 1/16th shadow ~= 50 kb for KHWASAN

Network performance [3]:
* 8.33 Gbits/sec for clean kernel
* 3.17 Gbits/sec for KASAN
* 2.85 Gbits/sec for KHWASAN

Note, that KHWASAN (compared to KASAN) doesn't require quarantine.

[1] Time before the ext4 driver is initialized.
[2] Measured as `cat /proc/meminfo | grep Slab`.
[3] Measured as `iperf -s & iperf -c 127.0.0.1 -t 30`.

The above doesn't actually demonstrate the whole point of the
patchset: to reduce KASAN's very high memory consumption?

You mean that memory usage numbers collected after boot don't give a
representative picture of actual memory consumption on real workloads?

What kind of memory consumption testing would you like to see?

Well, 100kb or so is a teeny amount on virtually any machine.  I'm
assuming the savings are (much) more significant once the machine gets
loaded up and doing work?

So with clean kernel after boot we get 40 kb memory usage. With KASAN
it is ~120 kb, which is 200% overhead. With KHWASAN it's 50 kb, which
is 25% overhead. This should approximately scale to any amounts of
used slab memory. For example with 100 mb memory usage we would get
+200 mb for KASAN and +25 mb with KHWASAN. (And KASAN also requires
quarantine for better use-after-free detection). I can explicitly
mention the overhead in %s in the changelog.

If you think it makes sense, I can also make separate measurements
with some workload. What kind of workload should I use?