linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.24-git4+ regression

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:	Mon, 4 Feb 2008 18:00:49 +0100
From:	Lukas Hejtmanek <xhejtman@....muni.cz>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, mingo@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.24-git4+ regression

On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 03:45:10PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > see my previous mail to Ingo (you were Cc.), latency top says that Xorg and
> > gnome-terminal suffers 300+ms latency in scheduler: waiting for cpu.
> 
> what happens when you turn CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED off?

If I disable CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED, it is a lot better. I would not call it
optimal, though. 

Xorg has 20ms latency, gnome-terminal another 20ms latency. If I just press
a key (a letter for instance) to see how autorepeat fills terminal, one can
see that autorepeat is not smooth and it is stopping for a little while
(really extra short stops are visible but still visible). But  it is really 
a ton better that it was with fair group sched.

So, any conclusion? The case is closed or any further investigation should be 
done?

-- 
Lukáš Hejtmánek
--
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/