linux-kernel - Re: [RT LATENCY] 249 microsecond latency caused by slub's unfreeze

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: <0000013da1f93be3-c3d42ae8-ff34-4c63-8094-77a83291ea19-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Date:	Mon, 25 Mar 2013 14:34:58 +0000
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	RT <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Clark Williams <clark@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RT LATENCY] 249 microsecond latency caused by slub's
 unfreeze_partials() code.

On Fri, 22 Mar 2013, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> I uploaded it here:
>
> http://rostedt.homelinux.com/private/slab_partials
>
> See anything I should be worried about?

Looks fine. Maybe its the spinlocks being contended that cause the
long holdoff? How does RT deal with the spinlocks? Dont know too much
about it.

You can eliminate the whole thing by setting

/sys/kernel/slab/<whatever/cpu_partial

to zero.

--
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/