| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:33:19 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> cc: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, rjw@...k.pl, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org, cl@...ux-foundation.org, efault@....de, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com> Subject: Re: [Bug #11308] tbench regression on each kernel release from 2.6.22 -> 2.6.28 On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > hm, i'm not sure whether i can post benchmarks from the Nehalem box - > but i can confirm it in general terms that it's rather nice ;-) Intel released the NDA from various web sites a week or two ago, and Intel is now selling it in the US (I think today was in fact the official launch), so I think benchmarks are safe - you can buy the dang things on the street. I don't know what availability is, of course. But I doubt that Intel would mind Nehalem benchmarks even if it were a paper launch - at least from my personal experience, I've not seen any bad behavior (and plenty of good). > This was run on another testbox (4x4 Barcelona) that rocks similarly > well in terms of memory subsystem latencies: which seems to be > tbench's main current critical path. Ahh, ok. Linus -- 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