linux-kernel - Re: Performance issue since 3.2.6

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]

Date:	Mon, 21 Jan 2013 15:26:10 +0100
From:	Olivier Doucet <webmaster@...ux.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Performance issue since 3.2.6

>> FYI, I benchmarked a new version with :
>> CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME=y
>> CONFIG_PM=y
>>
>> but the performance loss is still present.
>
> In that case it is not quite likely that the commit you bisected to
> really introduced the problem, because it doesn't change things for
> CONFIG_PM=y.
>
> Does reverting that commit still help?

I tested several combinations. Results follows :
3.2.6 (base) + CONFIG_PM unset  => BAD
3.2.6 (base) + CONFIG_PM=y  => BAD
3.2.6 (base) + patch reverted + CONFIG_PM=y  => BAD
3.2.6 (base) + patch reverted + CONFIG_PM unset  => GOOD

So if I understand right, the targeted patch introduced the bug when
CONFIG_PM is unset, but there is an other bug when this var is set.
I'll try to track this commit.

Olivier
--
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/