linux-kernel - Re: [lkp] [x86/hweight] 65ea11ec6a: will-it-scale.per_process

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, 17 Aug 2016 07:46:05 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@...el.com>,
	Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
	Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, lkp@...org
Subject: Re: [lkp] [x86/hweight]  65ea11ec6a:  will-it-scale.per_process_ops
 9.3% improvement

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 04:09:19PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On August 16, 2016 10:16:35 AM PDT, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de> wrote:
> >On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 09:59:00AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >> Dang...
> >
> >Isn't 9.3% improvement a good thing(tm) ?
> 
> Yes, it's huge.  The only explanation I could imagine is that scrambling %rdi caused the scheduler to do completely the wrong thing.

I'm questioning the validity, actually. Report says test machine was
Sandy Bridge-EP and I'd bet good money this one has POPCNT support so
how are we even hitting that __sw_hweight64() path, at all?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.

SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--