linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.24-rc1: First impressions

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]

Message-ID: <47238E0B.2010601@tmr.com>
Date:	Sat, 27 Oct 2007 15:14:19 -0400
From:	Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, spamtrap@...bisoft.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
	wfg@...l.ustc.edu.cn, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	riel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: 2.6.24-rc1: First impressions

Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:33:40 +0200
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> 
>> * Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>

>> so a final 'sync' should be added to the test too, and the time it takes 
>> factored into the bandwidth numbers?
> 
> That's one way of doing it.  Or just run the test for a "long" time.  ie:
> much longer than (total-memory / disk-bandwidth).  Probably the latter
> will give a more accurate result, but it can get boring.
> 
Longer might be less inaccurate, but without flushing the last data you 
really don't get best accuracy, you just reduce the error. Clearly doing 
fdatasync() is best, since other i/o caused by sync() can skew the results.

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot
-
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/