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: <20071026112307.GA30406@elte.hu> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:23:07 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> To: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> Subject: Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1 * Zhang, Yanmin <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com> wrote: > I tested 2.6.24-rc1 on my x86_64 machine which has 2 quad-core processors. > > Comparing with 2.6.23, aim7 has about -30% regression. I did a bisect > and found patch > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=b5869ce7f68b233ceb81465a7644be0d9a5f3dbb > caused the issue. weird, that's a commit diff - i.e. it changes no code. > kbuild/SPECjbb2000/SPECjbb2005 also has big regressions. On my another > tigerton machine (4 quad-core processors), SPECjbb2005 has more than > -40% regression. I didn't do a bisect on such benchmark testing, but I > suspect the root cause is like aim7's. these two commits might be relevant: 7a6c6bcee029a978f866511d6e41dbc7301fde4c 95dbb421d12fdd9796ed153853daf3679809274f but a bisection result would be the best info. Ingo - 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