linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/31] numa/core patches

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20121030082810.b9576441.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2012 08:28:10 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/31] numa/core patches


On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 12:20:32 +0000 Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de> wrote:

> ...

Useful testing - thanks.  Did I miss the description of what
autonumabench actually does?  How representitive is it of real-world
things?

> I also expect autonuma is continually scanning where as schednuma is
> reacting to some other external event or at least less frequently scanning.

Might this imply that autonuma is consuming more CPU in kernel threads,
the cost of which didn't get included in these results?
--
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/