linux-kernel - Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements

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: <20090908120311.GK22901@mit.edu>
Date:	Tue, 8 Sep 2009 08:03:11 -0400
From:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To:	Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@...or.de>
Cc:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements

On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 01:13:34PM +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>> despite the untranslated content, it is clear that you have scheduler
>> delays (either due to scheduler bugs or cpu contention) of upto 68
>> msecs... Second in line is your binary AMD graphics driver that is
>> chewing up 14% of your total latency...
>
> I've now used a correctly installed and up-to-date version of latencytop  
> and repeated the test.  Also, I got rid of AMD's binary blob and used  
> kernel DRM drivers for my graphics card to throw fglrx out of the  
> equation (which btw didn't help; the exact same problems occur).
>
> Here the result:
>
>     http://foss.math.aegean.gr/~realnc/pics/latop2.png

This was with an unmodified 2.6.31-rcX kernel?  Does Latencytop do
anything useful on a BFS-patched kernel?

							- Ted
--
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/