| 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: <20081121.010320.73660585.davem@davemloft.net> Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:03:20 -0800 (PST) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: mingo@...e.hu Cc: cl@...ux-foundation.org, rjw@...k.pl, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org, efault@....de, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl Subject: Re: [Bug #11308] tbench regression on each kernel release from 2.6.22 -> 2.6.28 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:30:44 +0100 > > * Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > hmmm... Well we are almost there. > > > > 2.6.22: > > > > Throughput 2526.15 MB/sec 8 procs > > > > 2.6.28-rc5: > > > > Throughput 2486.2 MB/sec 8 procs > > > > 8p Dell 1950 and the number of processors specified on the tbench > > command line. > > And with net-next we might even be able to get past that magic limit? > net-next is linus-latest plus the latest and greatest networking bits: In any event I'm happy to toss this from the regression list. My sparc still shows the issues and I'll profile that independently. I'm pretty sure it's the indirect calls and the deeper stack frames (which == 128 bytes of extra stores at each level to save the register window), but I need to prove that first. -- 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