linux-kernel - Re: [patch v2 4/4] percpu_counter: use atomic64 for counter

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]

Date:	Thu, 14 Apr 2011 04:07:47 +0900
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	shaohua.li@...el.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	cl@...ux.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [patch v2 4/4] percpu_counter: use atomic64 for counter

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 03:57:19PM +0800, shaohua.li@...el.com wrote:
> This can improve some workloads with percpu_counter->lock heavily contented.
> For example, vm_committed_as sometimes causes the contention. We should tune
> the batch count, but if we can make percpu_counter better, why not? In a 24
> CPUs system, 24 processes run stress mmap()/mmunmap(), the atomic method
> gives 50x faster.

Christoph already raised the issue but I'd also love to know a bit
more detail on the test than "50x faster".

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/