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: <20071211155226.GA1056@elte.hu>
Date:	Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:52:26 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Jie Chen <chen@...b.org>
Cc:	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:

> Hi, Ingo:
>
> I guess it is a good news. I did patch 2.6.21.7 kernel using your cfs 
> patch. The results of pthread_sync is the same as the non-patched 
> 2.6.21 kernel. This means the performance of is not related to the 
> scheduler. As for overhead of the gettimeofday, there is no difference 
> between 2.6.21 and 2.6.24-rc4. The reference time is around 10.5 us 
> for both kernel.

could you please paste again the relevant portion of the output you get 
on a "good" .21 kernel versus the output you get on a "bad" .24 kernel?

> So what is changed between 2.6.21 and 2.6.22? Any hints :-). Thank you 
> very much for all your help.

we'll figure it out i'm sure :)

	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/