linux/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_benchmark.c

249 lines
6.9 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

/*
* Strictly speaking, this is not a test. But it can report during test
* runs so relative performace can be measured.
*/
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <assert.h>
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
#include <limits.h>
#include <stdbool.h>
#include <stddef.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <time.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <linux/filter.h>
#include <linux/seccomp.h>
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
#include <sys/param.h>
#include <sys/prctl.h>
#include <sys/syscall.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#define ARRAY_SIZE(a) (sizeof(a) / sizeof(a[0]))
unsigned long long timing(clockid_t clk_id, unsigned long long samples)
{
struct timespec start, finish;
unsigned long long i;
pid_t pid, ret;
pid = getpid();
assert(clock_gettime(clk_id, &start) == 0);
for (i = 0; i < samples; i++) {
ret = syscall(__NR_getpid);
assert(pid == ret);
}
assert(clock_gettime(clk_id, &finish) == 0);
i = finish.tv_sec - start.tv_sec;
i *= 1000000000ULL;
i += finish.tv_nsec - start.tv_nsec;
printf("%lu.%09lu - %lu.%09lu = %llu (%.1fs)\n",
finish.tv_sec, finish.tv_nsec,
start.tv_sec, start.tv_nsec,
i, (double)i / 1000000000.0);
return i;
}
unsigned long long calibrate(void)
{
struct timespec start, finish;
unsigned long long i, samples, step = 9973;
pid_t pid, ret;
int seconds = 15;
printf("Calibrating sample size for %d seconds worth of syscalls ...\n", seconds);
samples = 0;
pid = getpid();
assert(clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &start) == 0);
do {
for (i = 0; i < step; i++) {
ret = syscall(__NR_getpid);
assert(pid == ret);
}
assert(clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &finish) == 0);
samples += step;
i = finish.tv_sec - start.tv_sec;
i *= 1000000000ULL;
i += finish.tv_nsec - start.tv_nsec;
} while (i < 1000000000ULL);
return samples * seconds;
}
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
bool approx(int i_one, int i_two)
{
double one = i_one, one_bump = one * 0.01;
double two = i_two, two_bump = two * 0.01;
one_bump = one + MAX(one_bump, 2.0);
two_bump = two + MAX(two_bump, 2.0);
/* Equal to, or within 1% or 2 digits */
if (one == two ||
(one > two && one <= two_bump) ||
(two > one && two <= one_bump))
return true;
return false;
}
bool le(int i_one, int i_two)
{
if (i_one <= i_two)
return true;
return false;
}
long compare(const char *name_one, const char *name_eval, const char *name_two,
unsigned long long one, bool (*eval)(int, int), unsigned long long two)
{
bool good;
printf("\t%s %s %s (%lld %s %lld): ", name_one, name_eval, name_two,
(long long)one, name_eval, (long long)two);
if (one > INT_MAX) {
printf("Miscalculation! Measurement went negative: %lld\n", (long long)one);
return 1;
}
if (two > INT_MAX) {
printf("Miscalculation! Measurement went negative: %lld\n", (long long)two);
return 1;
}
good = eval(one, two);
printf("%s\n", good ? "✔️" : "");
return good ? 0 : 1;
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
struct sock_filter bitmap_filter[] = {
BPF_STMT(BPF_LD|BPF_W|BPF_ABS, offsetof(struct seccomp_data, nr)),
BPF_STMT(BPF_RET|BPF_K, SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW),
};
struct sock_fprog bitmap_prog = {
.len = (unsigned short)ARRAY_SIZE(bitmap_filter),
.filter = bitmap_filter,
};
struct sock_filter filter[] = {
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
BPF_STMT(BPF_LD|BPF_W|BPF_ABS, offsetof(struct seccomp_data, args[0])),
BPF_STMT(BPF_RET|BPF_K, SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW),
};
struct sock_fprog prog = {
.len = (unsigned short)ARRAY_SIZE(filter),
.filter = filter,
};
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
long ret, bits;
unsigned long long samples, calc;
unsigned long long native, filter1, filter2, bitmap1, bitmap2;
unsigned long long entry, per_filter1, per_filter2;
setbuf(stdout, NULL);
printf("Running on:\n");
system("uname -a");
printf("Current BPF sysctl settings:\n");
/* Avoid using "sysctl" which may not be installed. */
system("grep -H . /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable");
system("grep -H . /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_harden");
if (argc > 1)
samples = strtoull(argv[1], NULL, 0);
else
samples = calibrate();
printf("Benchmarking %llu syscalls...\n", samples);
/* Native call */
native = timing(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, samples) / samples;
printf("getpid native: %llu ns\n", native);
ret = prctl(PR_SET_NO_NEW_PRIVS, 1, 0, 0, 0);
assert(ret == 0);
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
/* One filter resulting in a bitmap */
ret = prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER, &bitmap_prog);
assert(ret == 0);
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
bitmap1 = timing(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, samples) / samples;
printf("getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): %llu ns\n", bitmap1);
/* Second filter resulting in a bitmap */
ret = prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER, &bitmap_prog);
assert(ret == 0);
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
bitmap2 = timing(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, samples) / samples;
printf("getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): %llu ns\n", bitmap2);
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
/* Third filter, can no longer be converted to bitmap */
ret = prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER, &prog);
assert(ret == 0);
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
filter1 = timing(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, samples) / samples;
printf("getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): %llu ns\n", filter1);
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
/* Fourth filter, can not be converted to bitmap because of filter 3 */
ret = prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER, &bitmap_prog);
assert(ret == 0);
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
filter2 = timing(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, samples) / samples;
printf("getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): %llu ns\n", filter2);
/* Estimations */
#define ESTIMATE(fmt, var, what) do { \
var = (what); \
printf("Estimated " fmt ": %llu ns\n", var); \
if (var > INT_MAX) \
goto more_samples; \
} while (0)
ESTIMATE("total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter", calc,
bitmap1 - native);
ESTIMATE("total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters", calc,
bitmap2 - native);
ESTIMATE("total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters", calc,
filter1 - native);
ESTIMATE("total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters", calc,
filter2 - native);
ESTIMATE("seccomp entry overhead", entry,
bitmap1 - native - (bitmap2 - bitmap1));
ESTIMATE("seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff)", per_filter1,
filter2 - filter1);
ESTIMATE("seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4)", per_filter2,
(filter2 - native - entry) / 4);
printf("Expectations:\n");
ret |= compare("native", "", "1 bitmap", native, le, bitmap1);
bits = compare("native", "", "1 filter", native, le, filter1);
if (bits)
goto more_samples;
ret |= compare("per-filter (last 2 diff)", "", "per-filter (filters / 4)",
per_filter1, approx, per_filter2);
bits = compare("1 bitmapped", "", "2 bitmapped",
bitmap1 - native, approx, bitmap2 - native);
if (bits) {
printf("Skipping constant action bitmap expectations: they appear unsupported.\n");
goto out;
}
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
ret |= compare("entry", "", "1 bitmapped", entry, approx, bitmap1 - native);
ret |= compare("entry", "", "2 bitmapped", entry, approx, bitmap2 - native);
ret |= compare("native + entry + (per filter * 4)", "", "4 filters total",
entry + (per_filter1 * 4) + native, approx, filter2);
if (ret == 0)
goto out;
selftests/seccomp: Compare bitmap vs filter overhead As part of the seccomp benchmarking, include the expectations with regard to the timing behavior of the constant action bitmaps, and report inconsistencies better. Example output with constant action bitmaps on x86: $ sudo ./seccomp_benchmark 100000000 Current BPF sysctl settings: net.core.bpf_jit_enable = 1 net.core.bpf_jit_harden = 0 Benchmarking 200000000 syscalls... 129.359381409 - 0.008724424 = 129350656985 (129.4s) getpid native: 646 ns 264.385890006 - 129.360453229 = 135025436777 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 1 filter (bitmap): 675 ns 399.400511893 - 264.387045901 = 135013465992 (135.0s) getpid RET_ALLOW 2 filters (bitmap): 675 ns 545.872866260 - 399.401718327 = 146471147933 (146.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 3 filters (full): 732 ns 696.337101319 - 545.874097681 = 150463003638 (150.5s) getpid RET_ALLOW 4 filters (full): 752 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 1 bitmapped filter: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 2 bitmapped filters: 29 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 3 full filters: 86 ns Estimated total seccomp overhead for 4 full filters: 106 ns Estimated seccomp entry overhead: 29 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (last 2 diff): 20 ns Estimated seccomp per-filter overhead (filters / 4): 19 ns Expectations: native ≤ 1 bitmap (646 ≤ 675): ✔️ native ≤ 1 filter (646 ≤ 732): ✔️ per-filter (last 2 diff) ≈ per-filter (filters / 4) (20 ≈ 19): ✔️ 1 bitmapped ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 1 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ entry ≈ 2 bitmapped (29 ≈ 29): ✔️ native + entry + (per filter * 4) ≈ 4 filters total (755 ≈ 752): ✔️ [YiFei: Changed commit message to show stats for this patch series] Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1b61df3db85c5f7f1b9202722c45e7b39df73ef2.1602431034.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu
2020-10-11 23:47:45 +08:00
more_samples:
printf("Saw unexpected benchmark result. Try running again with more samples?\n");
out:
return 0;
}