| 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: <20070410164054.GI3948@linux-os.sc.intel.com> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 09:40:54 -0700 From: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Cc: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, nickpiggin@...oo.com.au, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] sched: align rq to cacheline boundary On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 08:24:22AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Siddha, Suresh B <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com> wrote: > > > Align the per cpu runqueue to the cacheline boundary. This will > > minimize the number of cachelines touched during remote wakeup. > > > -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct rq, runqueues); > > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct rq, runqueues) ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp; > > ouch!! Now how did _that_ slip through. The runqueues had been > cacheline-aligned for ages. Or at least, they were supposed to be. perhaps the per_cpu definition gave the impression of cacheline aligned too.. > > could you see any improvement in profiles or workloads with this patch > applied? (just curious - it's an obviously right fix) We have seen 0.5% perf improvement on database workload on a 2 node setup. 0.5% is a very good improvement for this workload. thanks, suresh - 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