linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -tip] cpuacct: Make cpuacct hierarchy walk in cpuacct

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: <20090318160827.fa53cb9b.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Wed, 18 Mar 2009 16:08:27 +0900
From:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To:	bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] cpuacct: Make cpuacct hierarchy walk in
 cpuacct_charge() safe when rcupreempt is used.

On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 10:18:01 +0530
Bharata B Rao <bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Looks ok to me, but will wait for experts' comments.
> 
> However, I did a quick measurement of read times with percpu_counter_read()
> (no readside lock) and percpu_counter_sum() (readside lock) and I don't
> see a major slowdown with percpu_counter_sum().
> 
> Time taken for 100 reads of cpuacct.stat with 1s delay b/n every read.
> percpu_counter_read() - 9845 us
> percpu_counter_sum() - 9974 us
> 
Then, almost 1 us overhead per read().....Hmm, seems big (as counter).

Thanks,
-Kame

--
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/