linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/20] mm: Preemptibility -v4

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]

Date:	Tue, 14 Sep 2010 13:36:25 +0800
From:	"Alex,Shi" <alex.shi@...el.com>
To:	a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>
Subject: Re:  [PATCH 00/20] mm: Preemptibility -v4

Peter:
We tested your tree base on 2.6.36-rc3 kernel. The testing covered on
Core2 2P, NHM-EP/WSM-EP machines, no clear performance regression found
on your patch compare to 36-rc3, and also no clear improvements on our
benchmarks. 

The benchmarks are listed in the following website, and plus some of
FFSB/FIO scenarios.  http://kernel-perf.sourceforge.net/ 

Regards! 
Alex 

> From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> Date: Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 10:16 PM
> Subject: [PATCH 00/20] mm: Preemptibility -v4
> To: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>, Avi Kivity
> <avi@...hat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Rik van Riel
> <riel@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
> akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Benjamin
> Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>, David Miller
> <davem@...emloft.net>, Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>, Mel
> Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Peter Zijlstra
> <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
> Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>, Stephen Rothwell
> <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> 
> 
> This patch-set makes part of the mm a lot more preemptible. It converts
> i_mmap_lock and anon_vma->lock to mutexes and makes mmu_gather fully
> preemptible.
> 
> The main motivation was making mm_take_all_locks() preemptible, since it
> appears people are nesting hundreds of spinlocks there.
> 
> The side-effects are that can finally make mmu_gather preemptible,
> something which lots of people have wanted to do for a long time.
> 
> It also gets us anon_vma refcounting, which seems to result in a nice
> cleanup of the anon_vma lifetime rules wrt KSM and compaction.
> 
> This patch-set it build and boot-tested on x86_64 (a previous version was
> also tested on Dave's Niagra2 machines, and I suppose s390 did too when
> Martin provided the conversion patch for his arch).
> 
> There are no known architectures left unconverted, although some arch code
> never did see a compiler (superh and ia64 come to mind, I'll try and
> update my toolchains next week).
> 
> Yanmin ran the last posting through the comprehensive Intel test farm
> and didn't find any regressions.
> 
> ( Not included in this posting are the 4 Sparc64 patches that implement
>  gup_fast, those can be applied separately after this series gets
>  anywhere. )
> 
> Full series (including the Sparc64 gup_fast bits) also available in -git
> form from (against Linus' tree as of about an hour ago):
> 
>  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/peterz/linux-2.6-mmu_preempt.git
> mmu_preempt
> 
> Do people feel its ready to get added to -next?
> 
> 
> --
> 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/


--
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/