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  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:	Fri, 30 Dec 2011 03:11:49 -0500
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <>
To:	Tao Ma <>
	David Rientjes <>,
	Minchan Kim <>,
	Mel Gorman <>,
	Johannes Weiner <>,
	Andrew Morton <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: do not drain pagevecs for mlock

2011/12/30 Tao Ma <>:
> In our test of mlock, we have found some severe performance regression
> in it. Some more investigations show that mlocked is blocked heavily
> by lur_add_drain_all which calls schedule_on_each_cpu and flush the work
> queue which is very slower if we have several cpus.
> So we have tried 2 ways to solve it:
> 1. Add a per cpu counter for all the pagevecs so that we don't schedule
>   and flush the lru_drain work if the cpu doesn't have any pagevecs(I
>   have finished the codes already).
> 2. Remove the lru_add_drain_all.
> The first one has some problems since in our product system, all the cpus
> are busy, so I guess there is very little chance for a cpu to have 0 pagevecs
> except that you run several consecutive mlocks.
> From the commit log which added this function(8891d6da), it seems that we
> don't have to call it. So the 2nd one seems to be both easy and workable and
> comes this patch.

Could you please show us your system environment and benchmark programs?
Usually lru_drain_** is very fast than mlock() body because it makes
plenty memset(page).
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists