| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20061022013454.GA4418@linux-mips.org>
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 02:34:54 +0100
From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, nickpiggin@...oo.com.au,
akpm@...l.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, anemo@....ocn.ne.jp,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
James.Bottomley@...elEye.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Fix COW D-cache aliasing on fork
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 07:37:24PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Well, if you can re-create the performance numbers (Ralf - can you send
> the full series with the final "remove the now unnecessary flush" to
> Davem?), that will make deciding things easier, I think.
Blwo are numbers and comments from Atsushi Nemoto on two Toshiba TY49
cores with 16K rsp. 32K per primary cache. Each lmbench run was repeated
twice. The numbers taken without the flush_cache_mm hack to dup_mmap(),
so there are those 12% on fork which can easily be obtained in addition
on PIVT caches such as the TX49.
Processor, Processes - times in microseconds - smaller is better
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS Mhz null null open slct sig sig fork exec sh
call I/O stat clos TCP inst hndl proc proc proc
--------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
TX49-16K without-patch 197 0.72 2.40 17.7 34.3 82.9 2.84 26.2 2500 9364 39.K
TX49-16K without-patch 197 0.73 2.40 17.7 34.4 82.9 2.85 26.1 2495 9337 39.K
TX49-16K without-patch 197 0.72 2.40 17.8 34.3 82.9 2.85 26.1 2501 9341 39.K
TX49-16K with-patch 197 0.72 2.39 20.1 31.9 82.9 2.85 20.2 2491 9101 38.K
TX49-16K with-patch 197 0.72 2.39 20.1 32.8 82.9 2.86 20.2 2496 9058 38.K
TX49-16K with-patch 197 0.72 2.39 20.1 32.8 82.9 2.85 20.3 2501 9074 38.K
TX49-32K without-patch 396 0.36 1.19 6.78 11.3 41.0 1.41 8.15 1246 4674 19.K
TX49-32K without-patch 396 0.36 1.19 6.78 11.3 41.0 1.41 8.17 1251 4680 19.K
TX49-32K without-patch 396 0.36 1.19 6.79 11.3 41.0 1.41 8.15 1250 4682 19.K
TX49-32K with-patch 396 0.36 1.19 6.79 10.2 41.0 1.41 8.14 1230 4638 19.K
TX49-32K with-patch 396 0.36 1.19 6.78 10.2 40.9 1.41 8.14 1241 4628 19.K
TX49-32K with-patch 396 0.36 1.19 6.79 10.2 40.9 1.41 8.14 1238 4627 19.K
A little bit faster on exec/proc and open/close (why?). Strange
results on sig/hndl and stat on TX49-16K again.
Context switching - times in microseconds - smaller is better
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS 2p/0K 2p/16K 2p/64K 8p/16K 8p/64K 16p/16K 16p/64K
ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw ctxsw
--------- ------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------- -------
TX49-16K without-patch 4.7800 87.1 36.5 97.2 47.8 101.1 40.8
TX49-16K without-patch 5.4000 88.4 28.9 96.2 39.6 101.2 40.8
TX49-16K without-patch 4.6800 84.5 32.7 96.8 46.5 100.2 42.9
TX49-16K with-patch 2.4600 82.7 34.0 93.5 50.5 97.2 43.3
TX49-16K with-patch 1.5200 87.7 33.6 95.1 42.4 99.7 43.6
TX49-16K with-patch 1.7700 86.2 34.1 95.8 49.0 99.2 41.7
TX49-32K without-patch 31.4 11.3 72.1 15.2 72.3 16.9
TX49-32K without-patch 30.4 11.6 72.2 16.1 73.2 15.1
TX49-32K without-patch 33.5 12.1 71.2 15.5 73.0 17.0
TX49-32K with-patch 30.9 11.5 72.3 17.4 73.1 17.5
TX49-32K with-patch 31.5 11.9 71.8 15.8 73.0 16.7
TX49-32K with-patch 32.5 10.4 71.7 16.0 72.5 16.6
No noticeable differences.
File & VM system latencies in microseconds - smaller is better
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS 0K File 10K File Mmap Prot Page 100fd
Create Delete Create Delete Latency Fault Fault selct
--------- ------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------- ----- ------- -----
TX49-16K without-patch 251.8 192.5 1212.1 397.6 500.0 4.388 7.32710 50.5
TX49-16K without-patch 254.7 193.9 1197.6 394.9 505.0 4.412 7.34230 50.5
TX49-16K without-patch 252.6 193.6 1212.1 399.4 499.0 4.758 7.33790 50.5
TX49-16K with-patch 251.8 192.2 1207.7 391.7 502.0 0.143 7.32320 50.5
TX49-16K with-patch 252.7 194.0 1200.5 393.7 505.0 0.108 7.32030 50.5
TX49-16K with-patch 252.0 191.8 1199.0 392.3 508.0 0.011 7.33150 50.5
TX49-32K without-patch 86.0 54.8 461.3 146.3 378.0 1.818 5.45460 25.0
TX49-32K without-patch 86.5 54.1 454.3 148.1 378.0 1.816 5.47120 25.0
TX49-32K without-patch 86.7 53.8 458.1 148.0 378.0 2.130 5.48540 25.0
TX49-32K with-patch 90.4 52.5 460.8 148.7 377.0 0.471 5.46340 25.0
TX49-32K with-patch 88.8 52.6 462.5 148.6 380.0 0.476 5.44630 25.0
TX49-32K with-patch 88.7 52.9 466.4 147.8 378.0 0.477 5.49560 25.0
Major improvements on Prot/Fault.
Ralf
-
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