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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 15:14:51 +0800 From: Hui Su <sh_def@....com> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sh_def@....com Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: simplify kmem cgroup charge/uncharge code On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 09:28:46AM -0800, Shakeel Butt wrote: > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 6:22 AM Hui Su <sh_def@....com> wrote: > > The reason to keep __memcg_kmem_[un]charge_page functions is that they > were called in the very hot path. Can you please check the performance > impact of your change and if the generated code is actually same or > different. Hi, Shakeel: I objdump the mm/page_alloc.o and comapre them, it change the assemble code indeed. In fact, it change some code order, which i personally think won't have impact on performance. And i ran the ltp mm and conatiner test, it seems nothing abnormal. BUT i still want to check whether this change will have negative impact on perforance due to this change code was called in the very hot path like you said, AND saddly i did not find a way to quantify the impact on performance. Can you give me some suggestion about how to quantify the performance or some tool? Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists