linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] PCI: Clear bridge MEM_64 flag if one child does not support it

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: <54877495.9090102@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 09 Dec 2014 23:15:49 +0100
From:	Marek Kordík <kordikmarek@...il.com>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
CC:	Wei Yang <weiyang@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Alexey Voronkov <zermond@...il.com>,
	Gavin Shan <gwshan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: Clear bridge MEM_64 flag if one child does not support
 it

On 12/09/2014 08:42 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Marek Kordík <kordikmarek@...il.com> wrote:
>>> I have built and booted your branch and it works well. Do you want me to
>>> attach some logs?
>>> (I am new here and I have read http://www.tux.org/lkml/ and I don't want to
>>> break some rules for attachment size)
>
> Hi Marek,
>
> Can you run some graphics benchmark program to check the performance
> between
> 1.
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/yinghai/linux-yinghai.git
>   branch: for-pci-allocate-fit-3.18
>
> 2.
> v 3.18 + clear mmio64 flags when children device does not support it
>
> Thanks
>
> Yinghai
>
I have run Unigine Heaven benchmark on both versions (I tried version 2. 
with and also without kernel parameters "debug ignore_loglevel 
pci=realloc") and the performance of each version was the same (70-71 
points). I tried to run this benchmark also with kernel 3.15.10 and the 
result was 67 points. Tomorrow I can try to run some more benchmarks, 
today I didn't have much time.

Marek
--
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/