linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/7] sched: select_idle

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: <20160525162449.GW3193@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Wed, 25 May 2016 18:24:49 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Chris Mason <clm@...com>, mingo@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, matt@...eblueprint.co.uk,
	mgalbraith@...e.de, tglx@...utronix.de, fweisbec@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/7] sched: select_idle_siblings rewrite

On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 10:51:20AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 12:48:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Hai,
> > 
> > here be a semi coherent patch series for the recent select_idle_siblings()
> > tinkering. Happy benchmarking..
> 
> This took a while, mostly because my original schbench showed your
> patches were just as fast as our internal patch, but our production
> benchmark showed a 5-10% regression.  My theory was just that schbench
> wasn't fine grained enough, and the load would stop before the
> regression kicked in.

Just to be sure; regression as per your production kernel, not vs.
mainline, right?