linux-kernel - Re: [slub p3 0/7] SLUB: [RFC] Per cpu partial lists V3

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: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1108020909100.18524@router.home>
Date:	Tue, 2 Aug 2011 09:10:46 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
cc:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, tj@...nel.org,
	Metathronius Galabant <m.galabant@...glemail.com>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Adrian Drzewiecki <z@...e.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [slub p3 0/7] SLUB: [RFC] Per cpu partial lists V3

On Mon, 1 Aug 2011, David Rientjes wrote:

>
> This applied nicely to Linus' tree so I've moved to testing atop that
> rather than slub/lockless on the same netperf testing environment as the
> slab vs. slub comparison.  The benchmarking completed without error and
> here are the results:
>
> 	threads		before		after
> 	 16		75509		75443  (-0.1%)
> 	 32		118121		117558 (-0.5%)
> 	 48		149997		149514 (-0.3%)
> 	 64		185216		186772 (+0.8%)
> 	 80		221195		222612 (+0.6%)
> 	 96		239732		241089 (+0.6%)
> 	112		261967		266643 (+1.8%)
> 	128		272946		281794 (+3.2%)
> 	144		279202		289421 (+3.7%)
> 	160		285745		297216 (+4.0%)
>
> So the patchset certainly looks helpful, especially if it improves other
> benchmarks as well.

The problem is that the partial approach has not been fine tuned yet for
these larger loads. And the proper knobs are not implemented yet.

> I'll review the patches individually, starting with the cleanup patches
> that can hopefully be pushed quickly while we discuss per-cpu partial
> lists further.

I am currently reworking the patches to operate on a linked list instead
of a very small array of pointers to page structs. That will allow much
larger per cpu partial lists and a dynamic configuration of the sizes.

--
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/