linux-kernel - Re: Major regression on hackbench with SLUB

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 13 Dec 2007 14:11:24 -0800 (PST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: Major regression on hackbench with SLUB

On Fri, 7 Dec 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> The biggest cost of __slab_alloc() in my profile is the "slab_lock()", but 
> that may not be the one that causes problems in a 64-cpu setup, so it 
> would be good to have that verified.

Hmmmm.. This would indicate lock contention on a slab.

> [ The whole node match thing is likely totally bogus. I suspect we pay 
>   *more* in trying to match nodes than we'd ever likely pay in just 
>   returning the wrong node for an allocation, but that's neither here nor 
>   there ]

Node match is necessary in order to make the allocator able to get memory 
for the node that the caller requested.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/