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: <CAHk-=whPbMBGWiTdC3wqXMGMaCCHQ4WQh5ObB5iwa9gk-nCtzA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 5 Jun 2019 13:16:46 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Jan Glauber <jglauber@...ium.com>
Cc:     Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Jayachandran Chandrasekharan Nair <jnair@...vell.com>,
        Jan Glauber <jglauber@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockref: Limit number of cmpxchg loop retries

On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 6:49 AM Jan Glauber <jglauber@...ium.com> wrote:
>
> Add an upper bound to the loop to force the fallback to spinlocks
> after some time. A retry value of 100 should not impact any hardware
> that does not have this issue.
>
> With the retry limit the performance of an open-close testcase
> improved between 60-70% on ThunderX2.

Btw, did you do any kind of performance analysis across different
retry limit values?

I'm perfectly happy to just pick a random number and '100' looks fine
to me, so this is mainly out of curiosity.

                       Linus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ