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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:31:20 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc:     kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@...el.com>,
        Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, lkp@...org,
        Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
Subject: Re: [LKP] [mm, memcg] 1e577f970f: will-it-scale.per_process_ops
 -7.2% regression

On Tue 10-09-19 15:08:41, Huang, Ying wrote:
> Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> writes:
> 
> > On Mon 09-09-19 10:15:44, kernel test robot wrote:
> >> Greeting,
> >> 
> >> FYI, we noticed a -7.2% regression of will-it-scale.per_process_ops due to commit:
> >
> > What is the memcg setup for this test?
> 
> Except enabling memcg in kernel config, we don't do any special
> setup for memcg for the test.

OK, this is really interesting because the local events introduced by
this commits do not apply to the root memcg. So this smells like another
case when a microbenchmark is sensitive on the memcg layout changes.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ