| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1206256511.4367.3.camel@marge.simson.net> Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 08:15:11 +0100 From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> To: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com> Cc: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Nadia Derbey <Nadia.Derbey@...l.net>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: Scalability requirements for sysv ipc On Sun, 2008-03-23 at 07:38 +0100, Manfred Spraul wrote: > Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Sat, 2008-03-22 at 15:22 +0100, Manfred Spraul wrote: > > > >> Mike Galbraith wrote: > >> > >>> Total: 4691827 Total: 3942000 > >>> > >>> > >> Thanks. Unfortunately the test was buggy, it bound the tasks to the > >> wrong cpu :-( > >> Could you run it again? Actually 1 cpu and 4 cpus are probably enough. > >> > > > > Sure. (ran as before, hopefully no transcription errors) > > > > > Thanks: > sysv sem: > - 2.6.22 had almost linear scaling (up to 4 cores). > - 2.6.24.3 scales to 2 cpus, then it collapses. with 4 cores, it's 75% > slower than 2.6.22. > > sysv msg: > - neither 2.6.22 nor 2.6.24 scale very good. That's more or less > expected, the message queue code contains a few global statistic > counters (msg_hdrs, msg_bytes). Actually, 2.6.22 is fine, and 2.6.24.3 is not, just as sysv sem. I just noticed that pmsg didn't get recompiled last night (fat finger) , and sent a correction. -Mike -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists