linux-kernel - Re: Volanomark slows by 80% under CFS

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <46AAAE39.4070905@redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 27 Jul 2007 22:47:21 -0400
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com
CC:	mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Volanomark slows by 80% under CFS

Tim Chen wrote:
> Ingo,
> 
> Volanomark slows by 80% with CFS scheduler on 2.6.23-rc1.  
> Benchmark was run on a 2 socket Core2 machine.
> 
> The change in scheduler treatment of sched_yield 
> could play a part in changing Volanomark behavior.
> In CFS, sched_yield is implemented
> by dequeueing and requeueing a process .  The time a process 
> has spent running probably reduced the the cpu time due it 
> by only a bit. The process could get re-queued pretty close
> to head of the queue, and may get scheduled again pretty
> quickly if there is still a lot of cpu time due.  

I wonder if this explains the 30% drop in top performance
seen with the MySQL sysbench benchmark when the scheduler
changed to CFS...

See http://people.freebsd.org/~jeff/sysbench.png

-- 
Politics is the struggle between those who want to make their country
the best in the world, and those who believe it already is.  Each group
calls the other unpatriotic.
-
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/