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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 14:29:02 +0200 From: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> Cc: Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, kirill@...temov.name, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, dave@...olabs.net, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, haren@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, npiggin@...il.com, bsingharora@...il.com, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/20] Speculative page faults Hi Andrew, On 26/09/2017 01:34, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 09:27:43 -0700 Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 12:15 AM, Laurent Dufour >> <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >>> Despite the unprovable lockdep warning raised by Sergey, I didn't get any >>> feedback on this series. >>> >>> Is there a chance to get it moved upstream ? >> >> what is the status ? >> We're eagerly looking forward for this set to land, >> since we have several use cases for tracing that >> will build on top of this set as discussed at Plumbers. > > There has been sadly little review and testing so far :( > > I'll be taking a close look at it all over the next couple of weeks. > > One terribly important thing (especially for a patchset this large and > intrusive) is the rationale for merging it: the justification, usually > in the form of end-user benefit. > > Laurent's [0/n] provides some nice-looking performance benefits for > workloads which are chosen to show performance benefits(!) but, alas, > no quantitative testing results for workloads which we may suspect will > be harmed by the changes(?). Even things as simple as impact upon > single-threaded pagefault-intensive workloads and its effect upon > CONFIG_SMP=n .text size? I forgot to mention in my previous email the impact on the .text section. Here are the metrics I got : .text size UP SMP Delta 4.13-mmotm 8444201 8964137 6.16% '' +spf 8452041 8971929 6.15% Delta 0.09% 0.09% No major impact as you could see. Thanks, Laurent > If you have additional usecases then please, spell them out for us in > full detail so we can better understand the benefits which this > patchset provides. >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists