linux-kernel - Re: Performance degradation measurement [was Re: [PATCH 06/37] Security: Separate task security context from task

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 23 Mar 2008 01:17:17 -0400
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...l.org,
	Trond.Myklebust@...app.com, chuck.lever@...cle.com,
	nfsv4@...ux-nfs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, selinux@...ho.nsa.gov,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Performance degradation measurement [was Re: [PATCH 06/37] Security: Separate task security context from task_struct [ver #34]]

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 17:12:08 -0000, David Howells said:

(Sorry - finally catching up)

>  (1) SELinux enabled, none of the security patches:
> 
> 	(gdb) p (1.119+1.110+1.104+1.106+1.095+1.112+1.094+1.091+1.112)/9
> 	$3 = 1.104777777777777

>  (4) LSM/SELinux disabled, none of the security patches:
> 
> 	(gdb) p (1.121+1.136+1.137+1.121+1.122+1.131+1.121+1.131+1.118)/9
> 	$7 = 1.1264444444444437

What's up with *that*?  The *fastest* run with it disabled is 1.118, and
the *slowest* with it enabled is 1.119.  At that point, I have to wonder
what we're really measuring here....

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped