linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Re: REGRESSION: Performance regressions from switching anon

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:	Wed, 15 Jun 2011 14:27:42 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>, ak@...ux.intel.com,
	shaohua.li@...el.com, alex.shi@...el.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Re: REGRESSION: Performance regressions from switching anon_vma->lock to mutex

"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>  The time will still be consumed, but in softirq
>context, though of course with many fewer context switches.

So the problem with threads goes way beyond just the context switches, or even just the problem with tracing.

Threads change the batching behavior, for example. That is *especially* true with background threads or with realtime threads. Both end up having high priority -either because they are realtime, or because they've been sleeping and thus have been building up extra priority that way.

So when you wake up such a thread, suddenly you get preemption behaviour, or you get the semaphores deciding to break out of their busy loops due to need_resched being set etc.

In contrast, softirqs don't have those kinds of side effects. They have a much smaller effect on system behavior and just run the code we ask them to.

                Linus
--
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/