linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -tip 0/7] tools/perf: Update rbtree implementation and optimize users

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: <20171127171422.GB3298@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 27 Nov 2017 14:14:22 -0300
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:     Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Cc:     Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, jolsa@...hat.com,
        mingo@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip 0/7] tools/perf: Update rbtree implementation and
 optimize users

Em Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 08:14:57AM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso escreveu:
> On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> > > Applies on today's -tip tree. Please consider for v4.16.
> > 
> > No numbers on the improvements?
> 
> I have not done performance tests perse for perf, but ultimately
> it will depend a lot on the workload and size of the tree. I had
> previously measured, on a Xeon E5-2450 @ 2.10GHz, the cost of
> an rb_first() was ~60 cycles for 100 nodes, and ~75 cycles with
> 1000 nodes. fwiw.

I'll try to do some before/after perf stat runs to compare output and to
see the overall diff in cycles, etc.

- Arnaldo