linux-kernel - Re: [lkp] [sched/preempt] 103637a5b94: 12.4% fsmark.app_overhead, -1.4% fsmark.files_per

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

Message-ID: <20150726090101.GN19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Sun, 26 Jul 2015 11:01:01 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@...il.com>
Cc:	kernel test robot <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru>,
	LKP <lkp@...org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>,
	Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@...app.com>,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [lkp] [sched/preempt] 103637a5b94: 12.4% fsmark.app_overhead,
 -1.4% fsmark.files_per_sec

On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 07:32:03PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> I guess that's because of cond_resched_lock() usage in nfs_scan_commit_list().
> My patch fixes cond_resched_lock() which never worked since v3.13.

Yeah, I wasn't surprised to see preemptions go up with this patch, not
total throughput suffer a bit due to that.
--
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/