linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: queued spinlocks and rw-locks

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: <20170413103309.GA1875@yury-N73SV>
Date:   Thu, 13 Apr 2017 13:33:09 +0300
From:   Yury Norov <ynorov@...iumnetworks.com>
To:     Adam Wallis <awallis@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Jan Glauber <jglauber@...ium.com>, jason.low2@...com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] arm64: queued spinlocks and rw-locks

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 01:04:55PM -0400, Adam Wallis wrote:
> On 4/10/2017 5:35 PM, Yury Norov wrote:
> > The patch of Jan Glauber enables queued spinlocks on arm64. I rebased it on
> > latest kernel sources, and added a couple of fixes to headers to apply it 
> > smoothly.
> > 
> > Though, locktourture test shows significant performance degradation in the
> > acquisition of rw-lock for read on qemu:
> > 
> >                           Before           After
> > spin_lock-torture:      38957034        37076367         -4.83
> > rw_lock-torture W:       5369471        18971957        253.33
> > rw_lock-torture R:       6413179         3668160        -42.80
> > 
> 
> On our 48 core QDF2400 part, I am seeing huge improvements with these patches on
> the torture tests. The improvements go up even further when I apply Jason Low's
> MCS Spinlock patch: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/4/20/725

It sounds great. So performance issue is looking like my local
problem, most probably because I ran tests on Qemu VM.

I don't see any problems with this series, other than performance,
and if it looks fine now, I think it's good enough for upstream.

Yury.