linux-kernel - Re: [RFCv2 00/48] perf tools: Add threads to record command

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: <20181002214156.GA31554@krava>
Date:   Tue, 2 Oct 2018 23:41:56 +0200
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:     Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
        Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [RFCv2 00/48] perf tools: Add threads to record command

On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 10:23:37PM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote:

SNIP

> > Workload: matrix multiplication in 128 threads
> > 
> > 	P (period, ms)       : 3
> >  	runtime overhead (%) : 1.8x ~ 12.58 / 6.81
> >  	data loss (%)        : 9
> >  	LOST events          : 147
> >  	SAMPLE events        : 673299
> >         perf.data size (GiB) : 0.8
> 
> Please see more comparable data by P (period, ms), 
> runtime overhead and data loss metrics at the same time.
> 
> It start from serial implementation as the baseline and 
> then demonstrates possible improvement applying configurable 
> --aio(=N) and --threads(=T) implementations.
> 
> Smaller P values, with data loss and runtime overhead values
> equal or in small vicinity of the ones from serial implementation,
> might mean possible gain.

sry for delay.. ok, so it's not so bad afterall ;-)
thanks a lot for running the test

I need to rewrite some parts of it for the next post,
but I'd hate to lose your aio implementation and the
possibility to easily compare it against threaded
implementation

I think we are able to keep it along under --aio option
together with current (sync) write implementation and
future threads implementation.. could you make it available
only under --aio option (or such) and repost?

thanks,
jirka