linux-kernel - Re: [tbench regression fixes]: digging out smelly deadmen.

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.4.64.0810311313060.7072@wrl-59.cs.helsinki.fi>
Date:	Fri, 31 Oct 2008 13:15:00 +0200 (EET)
From:	"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
To:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, shemminger@...tta.com,
	zbr@...emap.net, rjw@...k.pl, mingo@...e.hu,
	s0mbre@...rvice.net.ru, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, efault@....de,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [tbench regression fixes]: digging out smelly deadmen.

On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Eric Dumazet wrote:

> Ilpo Järvinen a écrit :
> > On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > 
> > > David Miller a écrit :
> > > > From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
> > > > Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 11:40:16 +0200 (EET)
> > > > > > Let me remind that it is just a single process, so no ping-pong 
> >> & other
> > > > > lock related cache effects should play any significant role here, 
> > > no? (I'm
> > > > > no expert though :-)).
> > > > > Not locks or ping-pongs perhaps, I guess.  So it just sends and
> > > > receives over a socket, implementing both ends of the communication
> > > > in the same process?
> > > > > If hash chain conflicts do happen for those 2 sockets, just 
> > > traversing
> > > > the chain 2 entries deep could show up.
> > >
> > > tbench is very sensible to cache line ping-pongs (on SMP machines of
> > > course)
> > 
> > ...Sorry to disappoint you but we were discussion there on my AIM9 tcp_test
> > results :-).
> > 
> 
> Well, before you added AIM9 on this topic, we were focusing on tbench :)
>
> Sorry to disappoint you :)

It's all Stephen's fault, he added port randomization first... ;-)

-- 
 i.