linux-kernel - Re: SLUB: Increasing partial pages

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0801161421240.12024@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date:	Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:28:44 -0800 (PST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SLUB: Increasing partial pages

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008, Matthew Wilcox wrote:

> About 0.1-0.2%  0.3% is considered significant.

The results are that stable? A kernel compilation which slightly 
rearranges cachelines due to code and data changes typically leads to a 
larger variance on my 8 way box (gets even larger under NUMA). I would 
expect that the variations on a database load would be more significant.

I repeatedly saw patches from Intel to do minor changes to SLAB that 
increase performance by 0.5% or so (like the recent removal of a BUG_ON 
for performance reasons). These do not regress again when you build a 
newer kernel release?
--
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/