[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJcbSZHwZxH=NN+xk7N+O-47QQHmRchgqMS5==_HzH1no5ho9g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 12:12:13 -0700
From: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@...gle.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@...el.com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 2/2] mm: SLUB Freelist randomization
I thought the mix of slab_test & kernbench would show a diverse
picture on perf data. Is there another test that you think would be
useful?
Thanks,
Thomas
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 18 May 2016, Thomas Garnier wrote:
>
>> Yes, I agree that it is not related to the changes.
>
> Could you please provide meaningful test data?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists