| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAJRGBZz50QsoWTxGrFxyxoyiy-0-m9evC83dQdLrwTqZbM7oSA@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 23:00:06 +0800 From: Luming Yu <luming.yu@...il.com> To: arnd@...db.de Cc: jcm@...masters.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch update-v1] a simple hardware detector for latency as well as throughput ver. 0.1.0 On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 9:37 PM, Luming Yu <luming.yu@...il.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Luming Yu <luming.yu@...il.com> wrote: >> The patch is the fist step to test some basic hardware functions like >> TSC to help people understand if there is any hardware latency as well >> as throughput problem exposed on bare metal or left behind by BIOS or >> interfered by SMI. Currently the patch tests TSC, CPU Frequency, and >> RDRAND, which is a new CPU instruction to get random number introudced >> in new CPU like Intel Ivy Bridge, in stop_machine context. >> >> The tsc samples (ns) below are from a P4 system. You can change from 0 >> to 1000 in /sys/kernel/debug/hw_atency_test/threshold to TSC sample at ms. > > typo. > > s/ms/us/ > >> >> [root@p4 linux]# rmmod hw_latency_test >> [root@p4 linux]# insmod drivers/misc/hw_latency_test.ko >> [root@p4 linux]# echo tsc > /sys/kernel/debug/hw_latency_test/current >> [root@p4 linux]# echo 1 > /sys/kernel/debug/hw_latency_test/enable >> [root@p4 linux]# cat /sys/kernel/debug/hw_latency_test/sample >> 1340657264.0434121340 388 >> 1340657264.0935125912 379 >> 1340657265.0436123548 404 >> 1340657265.0937122432 441 >> .... >> ^C >> [root@p4 linux]# echo 0 > /sys/kernel/debug/hw_latency_test/enable >> >> Signed-off-by: Luming Yu <luming.yu@...el.com> >> --- >> I will add more tests after the first patch gets merged for those guys >> who want to directly play with new hardware functions, and latency and >> bandwidth is concern, or simply out of curiosity. The patch is based on >> hardware latency dector written by Jcm in RT-tree. I assume I can add >> Jcm's signed off here. >> >> >> drivers/misc/Kconfig | 7 + >> drivers/misc/Makefile | 2 + >> drivers/misc/hw_latency_test.c | 833 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 842 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/misc/Kconfig b/drivers/misc/Kconfig >> index c779509..a5216b5 100644 >> --- a/drivers/misc/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/misc/Kconfig >> @@ -123,6 +123,13 @@ config IBM_ASM >> for information on the specific driver level and support statement >> for your IBM server. >> >> +config HW_LATENCY_TEST >> + tristate "Testing module to detect hardware lattency and throughput" >> + depends on DEBUG_FS >> + depends on RING_BUFFER >> + depends on X86 I begun the tool on X86, but bear in mind that use standard kernel interface as much as possible. I was trying to measure CPU Frequency, but the use of calibrate_tsc forced me add a X86 dependency here. Other finding is recalibrate_cpu_khz() is a null function in SMP. But the only two users (p4-clockmod.c and powernow-k7.c) themselves could lack of users roo these days. Let me know if there are any other comments. My plan for the tool is to push it in 3.6 or 3.7. So I will routinely get back to the thread probably weekly or bi-weekly in the time frame. :-) The 0.2 will based on what I can see in upstream of the tool. Thanks!!! -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists