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]
Date:	Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:16:17 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Kanaka Juvva <kanaka.d.juvva@...el.com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/11] perf/x86/intel: Perform rotation on Intel CQM
 RMIDs

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 09:15:11PM +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
 +	/*
> +	 * A reasonable upper limit on the max threshold is the number
> +	 * of lines tagged per RMID if all RMIDs have the same number of
> +	 * lines tagged in the LLC.
> +	 *
> +	 * For a 35MB LLC and 56 RMIDs, this is ~1.8% of the LLC.
> +	 */
> +	__intel_cqm_max_threshold =
> +		boot_cpu_data.x86_cache_size * 1024 / (cqm_max_rmid + 1);

Seeing how a percentage is without unit, the 35MB figure seems
pointless.

Also, why would a flat distribution be a good measure for 'empty'? I
would think that would in fact constitute in use.

Should we make this 1/16th of this figure or any other random fraction <
1 ?
--
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