linux-kernel - Re: newidle balancing in NUMA domain?

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: <20091124065910.GE20981@wotan.suse.de>
Date:	Tue, 24 Nov 2009 07:59:10 +0100
From:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: newidle balancing in NUMA domain?

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 06:04:45PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de> wrote:
> 
> > > .32 is kind of closed, with us being at -rc8.
> > 
> > It's a bad regression though.
> 
> It's about 3 months too late for that. Ideally we want performance 

Too late for what? Reporting and reverting a regression? I don't
think so. It is not my problem if patches aren't tested well
enough before being merged.

If we release a kernel with this known problematic scheduler behaviour
then it gives userspace application writers far harder targets, and
also it will give *some* 2.6.32 users regressions if we find it has
to be fixed in 2.6.33.


> regressions to be looked for and reported when the patches go into the 
> devel tree. Failing that, -rc1 would be the good time to re-test 
> whatever workload you care about.
> 
> If you cannot test it in a regular fashion you can offload the testing 
> to us, by adding a similar/equivalent workload to 'perf bench sched'. 
> We'll make sure it stays sane.

What exactly tests *were* done on it? Anything that might possibly
trigger its obvious possibility for detremental behaviour? Something
like netperf?

--
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/