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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 13:04:38 +0800 From: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com> To: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Aneesh Kumar KV <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com> Subject: Re: VolanoMark regression with 2.6.27-rc1 On Fri, 2008-08-01 at 10:44 +0530, Dhaval Giani wrote: > On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 08:39:14AM +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 15:49 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > > > On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 09:39 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 15:31 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 11:20 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > > > > > > Ingo, > > > > > > > > > > > Oh, it looks like they are the old issues in 2.6.26-rc1 and the 2 patches were reverted before 2.6.26. > > > > > New patches are merged into 2.6.27-rc1, but the issues are still not resolved clearly. > > > > > http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0805.2/1148.html. > > > > > > > > The new smp-group stuff doesn't remotely look like what was in .26 > > > > > > > > Also, on my quad (admittedly smaller than your machines) both volano and > > > > sysbench didn't regress anymore - where they clearly did with the code > > > > reverted from .26. > > > The regression I reported exists on: > > > 1) 8-core+HT(totally 16 logical processor) tulsa: 40% regression with volano, 8% with oltp; > > > 2) 8-core+HT Montvale Itanium: 9% regression with volano; 8% with oltp; > > > 3) 16-core tigerton: %70 with volano, %18 with oltp; > > > 4) 8-core stoakley: %15 with oltp, testing failed with volanoMark. > > > > > > So the issues are popular on different architectures. > > I know kernel needs the features and it might not be a good idea to reject them over and over again. > > I will collect more data on tigerton and try to optimize it. > > Hi Yanmin, > > Would it be possible for you to switch of the group scheduling feature > and see if the regression still exists. In all our testing, we did not > see a regression. I would like to eliminate it from your testing as > well. I tested with CONFIG_GROUP_SCHED=n. To test faster, I simplified the benchmark parameter. volanoMark: kernel | result ---------------------------------------------------------- 2.6.27-rc1_group | 205901 ---------------------------------------------------------- 2.6.27-rc1_nogroup | 303377 ---------------------------------------------------------- 2.6.26_group | 529388 sysbench+mysql(readonly oltp): kernel | result ----------------------------------------------------------- 2.6.27-rc1_group | 560636 ----------------------------------------------------------- 2.6.27-rc1_nogroup | 604937 ----------------------------------------------------------- 2.6.26_group | 627384 > > The option to switch off would be CONFIG_GROUP_SCHED, that should disable > all the group scheduling features. > > Thanks, -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists