linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/24] iommu: Refactor DMA domain strictness

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: <CAD=FV=Xek6_Qp7U=PrvGgVTQ9BqDwN34QVKAhgrMVCh=PjvBqg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Jul 2021 17:06:59 -0700
From:   Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Cc:     Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        "list@....net:IOMMU DRIVERS <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>, Joerg
        Roedel <joro@...tes.org>," <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        suravee.suthikulpanit@....com, Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
        John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        Yong Wu <yong.wu@...iatek.com>,
        Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
        Chunyan Zhang <chunyan.zhang@...soc.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/24] iommu: Refactor DMA domain strictness

Hi,

On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 3:33 PM Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> I was definitely getting some inconsistencies in my tests where the
> eMMC speeds were getting into a bad state, but I don't believe it's
> related to your patch series.

I think this was just me being an idiot. I forgot that I'd been
running with KASAN, so that explains why my speeds were so much slower
than usual and probably also explains how it could get in a bad state
(I guess it also explains why sugov was eating up 30% of my CPU time
since that went away too!). No mystery here aside from why it took me
this long to realize it.

I'm now getting ~213 MB/s without forcing it to lazy and ~261 MB/s
with forcing it to lazy through sysfs (and without any other cpufreq
hacks).

-Doug