linux-kernel - Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

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

Message-Id: <1193650626.3019.198.camel@ymzhang>
Date:	Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:37:06 +0800
From:	"Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

On Mon, 2007-10-29 at 10:22 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 13:23 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * 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.
> I got the tag from #git log. As for above link, I just added prior http address,
> so readers could check the patch by clicking.
> 
> > 
> > > 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
> I did a quick testing. This patch has no impact.
> 
> >   95dbb421d12fdd9796ed153853daf3679809274f
> Above big patch doesn't include this one, which means if I do
> 'git checkout b5869ce7f68b233ceb81465a7644be0d9a5f3dbb', the kernel doesn't include
> 95dbb421d12fdd9796ed153853daf3679809274f.
> 
> > 
> > but a bisection result would be the best info.
> I will do a bisect between 2.6.23 and tag 9c63d9c021f375a2708ad79043d6f4dd1291a085.
I ran git bisect with kernel version as the tag. It looks like git will
be crazy sometimes. So I checked ChangeLog and used the number tag to replace
the kernel version and retested it.

It looks like at least 2 patches were responsible for the regression. I'm
doing sub-bisect now.

I could find aim7 regression on all my testing machines although the regression
percentage is different.

Machine					regression
8-core stoakley				30%
16-core tigerton			6%
tulsa(dual-core+HT, 16 logical cpu)	20%

-yanmin
-
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/