linux-kernel - ptrace performance (was: [Bug #12208] uml is very slow on 2.6.28 host)

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:	Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:44:17 +0100
From:	Michael Riepe <michael.riepe@...glemail.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
CC:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Subject: ptrace performance (was: [Bug #12208] uml is very slow on 2.6.28
 host)

Disclaimer: I'm not using UML, but these problems may be related.

> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12208
> Subject		: uml is very slow on 2.6.28 host
> Submitter	: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
> Date		: 2008-12-12 9:35 (93 days old)
> References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122907463518593&w=4

The other day I noticed a dramatic ptrace slowdown between 2.6.27 and
2.6.28.x (verified with 2.6.28.8). In particular, a command like

	dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null bs=1024k count=1024

will normally report a throughput in the GB/s range. On 2.6.27, this is
also true if you run

	strace -o /dev/null <dd command as above>

which is only a little slower. But if I do the same on 2.6.28.x, I get a
throughput of about 100 MB/s or less, i.e. less than 10%. I tried the
commands on three different machines (an Athlon64 3000+, a Core Duo
T2400 and an Atom 330), and they all behave similar. The more system
calls a program uses, the worse the slowdown (try the dd command with
bs=16k and count=65536, for example - but don't hold your breath).

Interestingly, the CPUs are mostly idle while the command is executing
on 2.6.28.x, but there is a high (system) load on 2.6.27. Therefore, I
suspect that it's a scheduling or maybe timer problem that was
introduced between 2.6.27 and 2.6.28. I haven't had the time to check
the rc kernels yet; perhaps someone else can run a quick check to verify
that it's gone in the latest 2.6.29-rc.

-- 
Michael "Tired" Riepe <michael.riepe@...glemail.com>
X-Tired: Each morning I get up I die a little
--
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/