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: <20191216145624.GU2844@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Mon, 16 Dec 2019 15:56:24 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Thara Gopinath <thara.gopinath@...aro.org>
Cc:     mingo@...hat.com, ionela.voinescu@....com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, rui.zhang@...el.com,
        qperret@...gle.com, daniel.lezcano@...aro.org,
        viresh.kumar@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        amit.kachhap@...il.com, javi.merino@...nel.org,
        amit.kucheria@...durent.com
Subject: Re: [Patch v6 0/7] Introduce Thermal Pressure

On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 11:11:41PM -0500, Thara Gopinath wrote:
> Test Results
> 
> Hackbench: 1 group , 30000 loops, 10 runs
>                                                Result         SD
>                                                (Secs)     (% of mean)
>  No Thermal Pressure                            14.03       2.69%
>  Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 32 ms      13.29       0.56%
>  Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 64 ms      12.57       1.56%
>  Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 128 ms     12.71       1.04%
>  Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 256 ms     12.29       1.42%
>  Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 512 ms     12.42       1.15%
> 
> Dhrystone Run Time  : 20 threads, 3000 MLOOPS
>                                                  Result      SD
>                                                  (Secs)    (% of mean)
>  No Thermal Pressure                              9.452      4.49%
>  Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 32 ms        8.793      5.30%
>  Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 64 ms        8.981      5.29%
>  Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 128 ms       8.647      6.62%
>  Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 256 ms       8.774      6.45%
>  Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 512 ms       8.603      5.41%

What is the conclusion, if any from these results? Clearly thermal
pressuse seems to help, but what window? ISTR we default to 32ms, which
is a wash for drystone, but sub-optimal for hackbench.


Anyway, the patches look more or less acceptible, just a bunch of nits,
the biggest being the fact that even if an architecture does not support
this there is still the code and runtime overhead.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ