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: <54F3A3FB-E99F-4278-AAAB-5B6A09247C4B@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 23 Mar 2010 18:57:34 +0100
From:	Anton Starikov <ant.starikov@...il.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bugzilla-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org,
	bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 15618] New: 2.6.18->2.6.32->2.6.33 huge regression in performance


On Mar 23, 2010, at 6:45 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> 
> 
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2010, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> 
>> It shows a very brutal amount of page fault invoked mmap_sem spinning 
>> overhead.
> 
> Isn't this already fixed? It's the same old "x86-64 rwsemaphores are using 
> the shit-for-brains generic version" thing, and it's fixed by
> 
> 	1838ef1 x86-64, rwsem: 64-bit xadd rwsem implementation
> 	5d0b723 x86: clean up rwsem type system
> 	59c33fa x86-32: clean up rwsem inline asm statements
> 
> NOTE! None of those are in 2.6.33 - they were merged afterwards. But they 
> are in 2.6.34-rc1 (and obviously current -git). So Anton would have to 
> compile his own kernel to test his load.

Thanks for info, I will try it now.

> We could mark them as stable material if the load in question is a real 
> load rather than just a test-case. On one of the random page-fault 
> benchmarks the rwsem fix was something like a 400% performance 
> improvement, and it was apparently visible in real life on some crazy SGI 
> "initialize huge heap concurrently on lots of threads" load.

It is not just a test-case, it is real-life code. With real-life problems on 2.6.32 and later :)


Anton.--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ