linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] use unfair spinlock when running on hypervisor.

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: <4C060ACC.7080103@zytor.com>
Date:	Wed, 02 Jun 2010 00:39:56 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
CC:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, npiggin@...e.de,
	tglx@...utronix.de, mtosatti@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] use unfair spinlock when running on hypervisor.

On 06/01/2010 10:39 AM, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 19:52:28 +0300, Avi Kivity said:
>> On 06/01/2010 07:38 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>>>> Your new code would starve again, right?
>>> Try it on a NUMA system with unfair memory.
>
>> We are running everything on NUMA (since all modern machines are now
>> NUMA).  At what scale do the issues become observable?
>
> My 6-month-old laptop is NUMA? Comes as a surprise to me, and to the
> perfectly-running NUMA=n kernel I'm running.
>
> Or did you mean a less broad phrase than "all modern machines"?
>

All modern multisocket machines, unless configured in interleaved memory 
mode.

	-hpa

--
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/