linux-kernel - Re: Possible bug from kernel 2.6.22 and above, 2.6.24-rc4

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: <20071205204645.GC25694@elte.hu>
Date:	Wed, 5 Dec 2007 21:46:46 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Jie Chen <chen@...b.org>
Cc:	Simon Holm Th??gersen <odie@...aau.dk>,
	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: Possible bug from kernel 2.6.22 and above, 2.6.24-rc4


* Jie Chen <chen@...b.org> wrote:

> I just disabled the affinity mask and reran the test. There were no 
> significant changes for two threads (barrier overhead is around 9 
> microseconds). As for 8 threads, the barrier overhead actually drops a 
> little, which is good. Let me know whether I can be any help. Thank 
> you very much.

sorry to be dense, but could you give me instructions how i could remove 
the affinity mask and test the "barrier overhead" myself? I have built 
"pthread_sync" and it outputs numbers for me - which one would be the 
barrier overhead: Reference_time_1 ?

	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/