| 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: <20120824144852.GA18850@gulag1.americas.sgi.com> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 09:48:52 -0500 From: Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@....com> To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> Cc: Nathan Zimmer <nzimmer@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, adobriyan@...il.com, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/proc: Move kfree outside pde_unload_lock On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:42:58PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 20:28 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > > > Thats interesting, but if you really want this to fly, one RCU > > conversion would be much better ;) > > > > pde_users would be an atomic_t and you would avoid the spinlock > > contention. > > Here is what I had in mind, I would be interested to know how it helps a 512 core machine ;) > Here are the results and they look great. cpuinfo baseline moved kfree Rcu tasks read-sec read-sec read-sec 1 0.0141 0.0141 0.0141 2 0.0140 0.0140 0.0142 4 0.0140 0.0141 0.0141 8 0.0145 0.0145 0.0140 16 0.0553 0.0548 0.0168 32 0.1688 0.1622 0.0549 64 0.5017 0.3856 0.1690 128 1.7005 0.9710 0.5038 256 5.2513 2.6519 2.0804 512 8.0529 6.2976 3.0162 -- 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