linux-kernel - [PATCH 0/5] RT: adaptive-lock enhancements

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080520143954.15992.85900.stgit@novell1.haskins.net>
Date:	Tue, 20 May 2008 10:49:10 -0400
From:	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
To:	mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
	linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sdietrich@...ell.com,
	pmorreale@...ell.com, mkohari@...ell.com, ghaskins@...ell.com
Subject: [PATCH 0/5] RT: adaptive-lock enhancements

Hi Ingo, Steven, Thomas,
  The following series are the scraps from adaptive-locks-v3 that have not yet
  been pulled into RT.  This series applies to 25.4-rt2.

  For the most part, this is the difference between adaptive-v3 and whats in
  the upstream tree, with the following exceptions:

  1) I have fixed an issue in the "optimize-wakeup" patch that went out in v3.
     There was a hunk left-over from when we applied adaptive to both spinlocks
     and mutexes.  We have since dropped mutexes, so that patch needed to be
     refactored to be correct.

  2) I have (for now) dropped the timeout feature.  It needs to be re-worked to
     apply to the current version of adaptive-locks that are in the tree.

  I also moved what was patch 6/8 in v3 to be first, because I believe it has
  the most potential of all the other patches to improve performance.

  I have performed some baseline analysis of these patches compared to
  25.4-rt2, which you can find here:

    ftp://ftp.novell.com/dev/ghaskins/25.4-rt2-adaptive-enhancements.pdf

  I only did hackbench runs for this round of testing, but you can see there is
  a small, but net-positive gain in the results.  I think the results are more
  profound for other benchmarks, but I didnt have the time to re-run them all
  yet.

  As always, comments/questions welcome.

  Regards,
   -Greg
--
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/