linux-kernel - specjbb2005 and aim7 regression with 2.6.32-rc kernels

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1257493130.16282.109.camel@ymzhang>
Date:	Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:38:50 +0800
From:	"Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>
To:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Subject: specjbb2005 and aim7 regression with 2.6.32-rc kernels

Comparing with 2.6.31, specjbb2005 and aim7 have some regressions with
2.6.32-rc kernels on core2 machines.

1) On 4*4 core tigerton: specjbb2005 has about 5% regression.
2) On 2*4 stoakley: aim7 has about 5% regression.

On Nehalem, specjbb2005 has about 2%~8%  improvement instead of regression.

aim7 has much dependency on schedule patameters, such like sched_latency_ns,
sched_min_granularity_ns, and sched_wakeup_granularity_ns. 2.6.32-rc kernel
decreases these parameter values. I restore them and retest aim7 on stoakley.
aim7 regression becomes about 2% and specjbb2005 regression also becomes
2%. But on Nehalem, the improvement shrinks.

--
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/