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]
Date:   Thu, 2 Sep 2021 11:46:28 +0800
From:   Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>
To:     Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Michal Koutn?? <mkoutny@...e.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        andi.kleen@...el.com, kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>,
        Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, lkp@...ts.01.org,
        kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
        "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        Zhengjun Xing <zhengjun.xing@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [mm] 2d146aa3aa: vm-scalability.throughput -36.4% regression

On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 07:23:24PM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> On 9/1/2021 6:35 PM, Feng Tang wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 08:12:24AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >>Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com> writes:
> >>>Yes, the tests I did is no matter where the 128B padding is added, the
> >>>performance can be restored and even improved.
> >>I wonder if we can find some cold, rarely accessed, data to put into the
> >>padding to not waste it. Perhaps some name strings? Or the destroy
> >>support, which doesn't sound like its commonly used.
> >Yes, I tried to move 'destroy_work', 'destroy_rwork' and 'parent' over
> >before the 'refcnt' together with some padding, it restored the performance
> >to about 10~15% regression. (debug patch pasted below)
> >
> >But I'm not sure if we should use it, before we can fully explain the
> >regression.
> 
> Narrowing it down to a single prefetcher seems good enough to me. The
> behavior of the prefetchers is fairly complicated and hard to predict, so I
> doubt you'll ever get a 100% step by step explanation.

Yes, I'm afriad so, given that the policy/algorithm used by perfetcher
keeps changing from generation to generation.

I will test the patch more with other benchmarks.

Thanks,
Feng

> 
> -Andi
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ