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: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 06:46:30 +0100 From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> To: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Subject: Re: hackbench regression with kernel 2.6.32-rc1 On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 08:50 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > On Wed, 2009-10-28 at 15:22 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-10-28 at 17:29 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > > > -Mike > > > I'm investigating 5% tbench regression on Nehalem machine. perf_counter shows > > > select_task_rq_fair consumes about 5% cpu time with 2.6.32-rc1 while it consumes > > > less than 0.5% with 2.6.31. > > > > > > Patch c88d5910890 has comments to explain it, but I still can't understand why > > > to add complicated balance logic when selecting task rq. > > > > > > I will check which section in function select_task_rq_fair consumes so much time. > > > > Turn off SD_WAKE_BALANCE as it was called in rc1. See commit 182a85f. > I run testing against 2.6.32-rc1 which already includes the patch. Duh, I checked the wrong tree. SD_PREFER_LOCAL is still on in rc1 though (double checks;), so you'll go through the power saving code until you reach a domain containing both waker's cpu and wakee's previous cpu even if that code already found that a higher domain wasn't overloaded. Looks to me like that block wants a want_sd && qualifier. Even it you turn SD_PREFER_LOCAL off, you can still hit the overhead if SD_POWERSAVINGS_BALANCE is set, so I'd make sure both are off and see if that's the source (likely, since the rest is already off). -Mike -- 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