linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] qspinlock: Improve performance by reducing load instruction rollback

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: <20151020091507.GV17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Tue, 20 Oct 2015 11:15:07 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Ling Ma <ling.ma.program@...il.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, mingo@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ma Ling <ling.ml@...baba-inc.com>,
	Waiman.Long@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] qspinlock: Improve performance by reducing load
 instruction rollback

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:57:53AM +0800, Ling Ma wrote:
> >
> > So it would be nice to create a new user-space spinlock testing facility, via a
> > new 'perf bench spinlock' feature or so. That way others can test and validate
> > your results on different hardware as well.
> >
> Attached the spinlock test module . Queued spinlock will run very
> slowly in user space
> because process switch context, it is OK for  spinlock-test
> implementation with kernel module ?

Works just fine in userspace if you pin each thread to a cpu and ensure
there's nothing else running on the system.

--
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/