linux-kernel - Re: IO queuing and complete affinity with threads (was Re: [PATCH 0/8] IO queuing and complete affinity)

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]

Date:	Thu, 07 Feb 2008 15:40:00 -0500
From:	"Alan D. Brunelle" <Alan.Brunelle@...com>
To:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arjan@...ux.intel.com, dgc@....com,
	npiggin@...e.de
Subject: Re: IO queuing and complete affinity with threads (was Re: [PATCH
 0/8] IO queuing and complete affinity)

Jens Axboe wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Here's a variant using kernel threads only, the nasty arch bits are then
> not needed. Works for me, no performance testing (that's a hint for Alan
> to try and queue up some testing for this variant as well :-)
> 
> 
I'll get to that, working my way through the first batch of testing on a NUMA platform. [[If anybody has ideas on specific testing to do, that would be helpful.]] I do plan on running some AIM7 tests, as those have shown improvement in other types of affinity changes in the kernel, and some of them have "interesting" IO load characteristics.

Alan

--
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/