linux-kernel - Re: idle issues running sembench on 128 cpus

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: <m2liymyqjt.fsf@firstfloor.org>
Date:	Wed, 04 May 2011 16:49:42 -0700
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Dave Kleikamp <dkleikamp@...il.com>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lenb@...nel.org, paulmck@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: idle issues running sembench on 128 cpus

Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> writes:

> On Thu, 5 May 2011, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 01:29:49AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> > That makes sense, but merging the timeouts race free will be a real
>> > PITA.
>> 
>> For this case one could actually use a spinlock between the siblings.
>> That shouldn't be a problem as long as it's not a global spinlock.
>
> Care to give it a try ?

Ok, will try tomorrow.

>> Here's a new patch without the raw. Boots on my Westmere.
>
>> +	cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
>
> Hmm. quilt refresh perhaps ? I know that feeling :)

The scp to copy the patch was too slow. Noticed it later and sent a new
one.

-Andi
-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
--
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/