linux-kernel - RE: Regression with SLUB on Netperf and Volanomark

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 8 May 2007 15:02:51 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
cc:	"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>,
	"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
	"Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin.zhang@...el.com>,
	"Wang, Peter Xihong" <peter.xihong.wang@...el.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: RE: Regression with SLUB on Netperf and Volanomark

On Tue, 8 May 2007, Tim Chen wrote:

> I tried the slub-patches and the avoid atomic overhead patch against
> 2.6.21-mm1.  It brings the TCP_STREAM performance for SLUB to the SLAB
> level.  The patches not mentioned in the "series" file did not apply
> cleanly to 2.6.21-mm1 and I skipped most of those.  

Ahhh. Great. The patches not mentioned should not be applied corredct.

> Without skip atomic overhead patch, the throughput drops by 1 to 1.5%.
> 
> The change from slub_min_order=0 slub_max_order=4 
> to slub_min_order=6 slub_max_order=7 did not make much difference in
> my tests.

Allright. I will then put that patch in.

-
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/