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  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]
Date:	Fri, 07 Dec 2007 17:29:44 +0100
From:	Holger Wolf <>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <>
Subject: Re: Scheduler behaviour

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 21:15:30 +0100
> Holger Wolf <> wrote:
>> We discovered performance degradation with dbench when using kernel
>> 2.6.23 compared to kernel 2.6.22.
>> In our case we booted a Linux in a IBM System z9 LPAR with 256MB of
>> ram with 4 CPU's. This system uses a striped LV with 16 disks on a
>> Storage Server connected via 8 4GBit links.
>> A dbench was started on that system performing I/O operations on the
>> striped LV. dbench runs were performed with 1 to 62 processes.
>> Measurements with a 2.6.22 kernel were compared to measurements with
>> a 2.6.23 kernel. We saw a throughput degradation from 7.2 to 23.4
> this is good news!
> dbench rewards unfair behavior... so higher dbench usually means a
> worse kernel ;)
tests with 2.6.22 including CFS  show the same results.
This means the pressure on page cache is much higher when all processes 
run in parallel.
We see this behavior as well with iozone when writing on many disks with 
many threads and just 256 MB memory.

This means the scheduler schedules as it should - fair.

regards Holger

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists