linux-kernel - Re: [Bug #11308] tbench regression on each kernel release from 2.6.22 -> 2.6.28

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: <20081117.115258.227376348.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 17 Nov 2008 11:52:58 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	mingo@...e.hu, rjw@...k.pl, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org, cl@...ux-foundation.org,
	efault@....de, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl
Subject: Re: [Bug #11308] tbench regression on each kernel release from
 2.6.22 -&gt; 2.6.28

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 11:48:33 -0800 (PST)

> We've asked _you_ to do NMI profiling, it shouldn't be the other way 
> around.

I wasn't able to on these systems, so instead I did cycle level
evaluation of the parts that have to run with interrupts disabled.

And as a result I found that wake_up() is now 4 times slower than it
was in 2.6.22, I even analyzed this for every single kernel release
till now.

It could be a sparc specific issue, because the call chain is deeper
and we eat a lot more register window spills onto the stack.
--
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/