linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 00/19] qspinlock: a 4-byte queue spinlock with PV support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <536A4A7A.3050001@hp.com>
Date:	Wed, 07 May 2014 11:00:10 -0400
From:	Waiman Long <waiman.long@...com>
To:	Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@...il.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>,
	Scott J Norton <scott.norton@...com>,
	Chegu Vinod <chegu_vinod@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 00/19] qspinlock: a 4-byte queue spinlock with PV support

On 04/27/2014 02:09 PM, Raghavendra K T wrote:
>
> For kvm part feel free to add:
> Tested-by: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> V9 testing has shown no hangs.
> I was able to do some performance testing. here are the results:
>
> Overall we are seeing good improvement for pv-unfair version.
>
> System : 32 cpu sandybridge with HT on. (4 node machine with 32 GB each)
> Guest: 8GB with 16 vcpu/VM.
> Average was taken over 8-10 data points.
>
> Base = 3.15-rc2    with PRAVIRT_SPINLOCK = y
> A = 3.15-rc2 + qspinlock v9 patch with QUEUE_SPINLOCK = y 
> PRAVIRT_SPINLOCK = y PARAVIRT_UNFAIR_LOCKS = y (unfair lock)
> B =  3.15-rc2 + qspinlock v9 patch with QUEUE_SPINLOCK = y 
> PRAVIRT_SPINLOCK = n PARAVIRT_UNFAIR_LOCKS = n (queue spinlock without 
> paravirt)
> C = 3.15-rc2 + qspinlock v9 patch with  QUEUE_SPINLOCK = y 
> PRAVIRT_SPINLOCK = y  PARAVIRT_UNFAIR_LOCKS = n (queue spinlock with 
> paravirt)
>
>
> Ebizzy % improvements
> ========================
> overcommit A        B        C
> 0.5x    4.4265        2.0611        1.5824
> 1.0x    0.9015        -7.7828       4.5443
> 1.5x    46.1162       -2.9845       -3.5046
> 2.0x    99.8150       -2.7116       4.7461
>
> Dbench     %improvements
> overcommit A        B        C
> 0.5x    3.2617        3.5436        2.5676
> 1.0x    0.6302        2.2342        5.2201
> 1.5x    5.0027        4.8275        3.8375
> 2.0x    23.8242       4.5782        12.6067
>
> Absolute values of base results: (overcommit, value, stdev)
> Ebizzy ( records / sec with 120 sec run)
> 0.5x 20941.8750 (2%)
> 1.0x 17623.8750 (5%)
> 1.5x  5874.7778 (15%)
> 2.0x  3581.8750 (7%)
>
> Dbench (throughput in MB/sec)
> 0.5x 10009.6610 (5%)
> 1.0x  6583.0538 (1%)
> 1.5x  3991.9622 (4%)
> 2.0x  2527.0613 (2.5%)
>

Thank for the testing. I will include your Test-by tag in the next version.

-Longman
--
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/