linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] ipc/sem.c: Bug fixes, regression fixes, v3

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]

Message-ID: <CA+55aFyhJTKsbx8DoRNC-gSQM7MNCSc-sntJn3fKn-S4jjF4-w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 26 May 2013 15:59:42 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>
Cc:	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Hai Huang <hhuang@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] ipc/sem.c: Bug fixes, regression fixes, v3

On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com> wrote:
>
> In lack of getting my swingbench DSS environment back, I ran these
> changes against the semop-multi program on my laptop. For 256 threads,
> with Manfred's patchset the ops/sec suffers around -7.3%.

Hmm. That test program only tests simple ops, right? So the slowdown
comes from either the code simply being that much slower due to extra
complexity, or from the fair wakeups..

Anyway, I applied 1/4, we can continue to discuss the rest.

          Linus
--
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/