linux-kernel - Re: PROBLEM: Unusually high load average when idle in 2.6.35, 2.6.35.1 and later

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: <20101003170912.GA18972@roll>
Date:	Sun, 3 Oct 2010 13:10:15 -0400
From:	tmhikaru@...il.com
To:	Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Chase Douglas <chase.douglas@...onical.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: PROBLEM: Unusually high load average when idle in 2.6.35, 2.6.35.1 and later

On Sun, Oct 03, 2010 at 12:21:43PM +0200, Florian Mickler wrote:
> Don't apologize, it's heroic. Do you still see the performance
> regression you reported in your original bug report? I don't exactly
> know if you are at the moment just talking about the bisected commit or
> if the performance regression you saw earlier was just some cosmic ray
> kind of thing...
> 
> If the load-average thing was just a red herring, it would probably
>  still be worthwile to bisect the performance regression.

No, I do not see the performance regression anymore, which is why I did all
that extra testing with the timed compiles - it proves that somewhere along
the line I made a mistake, and tricked myself into believing the load
average glitch *also* was causing performance issues. I was wrong.

Given I only started digging into the problem as far as I did because I
thought it was slowing things down, it's annoying. However, at least I did
find a real problem.

Tim McGrath
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped