linux-kernel - Re: [RFD PATCH 1/4] powerpc: cpu: Reduce the polling interval in __cpu

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:	Tue, 16 Jun 2009 22:07:23 +0530
From:	Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>
To:	Nathan Lynch <ntl@...ox.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>,
	Rusty Russel <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Paul E McKenney <paulmck@...ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
	Shoahua Li <shaohua.li@...ux.com>
Subject: Re: [RFD PATCH 1/4] powerpc: cpu: Reduce the polling interval in
	__cpu_up()

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:06:45AM -0500, Nathan Lynch wrote:
> Please cc linuxppc-dev if you want the powerpc maintainer to pick this
> up.

Will do it. I still need to test this patch across the different
configurations. I posted it here just so that we get a rough idea
regarding what we're looking at.

Thanks for taking a look at this one!
> 
> Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com> writes:
> > The cpu online operation on a powerpc today takes order of 200-220ms. Of
> > this time, approximately 200ms is taken up by __cpu_up(). This is because
> > we poll every 200ms to check if the new cpu has notified it's presence
> > through the cpu_callin_map. We poll every 200ms until the new cpu sets
> > the value in cpu_callin_map or 5 seconds elapse, whichever comes earlier.
> >
> > However, the time taken by the new processor to indicate it's presence has
> > found to be less than a millisecond
> 
> Only with your particular configuration (which is not identified).  It
> can take much longer than 1ms on others.
> 
> > Keeping this in mind, reduce the
> > polling interval from 200ms to 1ms while retaining the 5 second
> > timeout.
> 
> Ack on the patch, but the changelog needs work.  I assume your
> observations are from a pseries system -- please state this in the
> changelog ("powerpc" is too broad), along with the processor model and
> whether the LPAR's processors were configured in dedicated or shared
> mode.

Will send these details with the patch separately Ccing linux-ppcdev list.

-- 
Thanks and Regards
gautham
--
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/