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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 22:31:24 +0800 From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com> To: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com> CC: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Jet Chen <jet.chen@...el.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, lkp@...org, Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com> Subject: Re: [LKP] [rcu] c0f489d2c6f: -1.5% netperf.Throughput_tps On 07/25/2014 05:44 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 16:05 +0800, Aaron Lu wrote: >> On 07/25/2014 03:35 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote: >>> On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 14:45 +0800, Aaron Lu wrote: >>>> FYI, we noticed the below changes on >>>> >>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master >>>> commit c0f489d2c6fec8994c642c2ec925eb858727dc7b ("rcu: Bind grace-period kthreads to non-NO_HZ_FULL CPUs") >>>> >>>> abaa93d9e1de2c2 c0f489d2c6fec8994c642c2ec >>>> --------------- ------------------------- >>>> 12654 ~ 0% -1.5% 12470 ~ 0% ivb43/netperf/300s-25%-TCP_CRR >>>> 12654 ~ 0% -1.5% 12470 ~ 0% TOTAL netperf.Throughput_tps >>> >>> Out of curiosity, what parameters do you use for this test? In my >> >> The cmdline for this test is: >> netperf -t TCP_CRR -c -C -l 300 > > Thanks. That doesn't switch as heftily as plain TCP_RR, but I'd still > expect memory layout etc to make bisection frustrating as heck. But no > matter, I was just curious. The bisect is done by the LKP test system(developed by Fengguang) automatically so it's not that painful for me :-) But as you have said, the 1.5% change is too small and probably doesn't worth a report, I'll be more careful next time when examining the report. > > Aside: running unbound, the load may get beaten up pretty bad by nohz if > it's enabled. Maybe for testing the network stack it'd be better to > remove that variable? Dunno, just a thought. I only mention it because The CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL is set to y, I'll disable it to see if the number changes, thanks for the tips. Regards, Aaron > your numbers look very low unless the box is ancient or CPU is dinky. > > -Mike > -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists