linux-kernel - Re: SLUB: Increasing partial pages

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:16:18 -0700
From:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
To:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SLUB: Increasing partial pages

On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 02:01:08PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > I sent you a mail on December 6th ... here are the contents of that
> > mail:
> 
> Dec 6th? I was on vacation then and it seems that I was unable to 
> reproduce the oopses. Can I get some backtraces or other information 
> that would allow me to diagnose the problem?

I'll ask to see what they have.

> > Applying just patches 1-7 and 9 leads to a slight (0.34%) performance
> > reduction compared to slub.  That is 6.45% versus slab, reduces to 6.79%
> > with the 8 patches applied.
> 
> Patch 8 is the one that optimizes the fastpath. How much runtime 
> variability have these tests?

About 0.1-0.2%  0.3% is considered significant.

-- 
Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours.  We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
--
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/