linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 00/34] SLUB: reduce irq disabled scope and make it RT compatible

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: <64eda4de845c8d98e0dcb7f6fa3177037120e317.camel@gmx.de>
Date:   Sun, 18 Jul 2021 10:29:29 +0200
From:   Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 00/34] SLUB: reduce irq disabled scope and make it RT
 compatible

On Sun, 2021-07-18 at 09:41 +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 7/3/21 9:24 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Fri, 2021-07-02 at 20:29 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > > I replaced my slub changes with slub-local-lock-v2r3.
> > > I haven't seen any complains from lockdep or so which is good.
> > > Then I
> > > did this with RT enabled (and no debug):
> >
> > Below is some raw hackbench data from my little i4790 desktop
> > box.  It
> > says we'll definitely still want list_lock to be raw.
>
> Hi Mike, thanks a lot for the testing, sorry for late reply.
>
> Did you try, instead of raw list_lock, not applying the last, local
> lock patch, as I suggested in reply to bigeasy?

No, but I suppose I can give that a go.

	-Mike