linux-kernel - Re: [memcg] 45208c9105: aim7.jobs-per-min -14.0% regression

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:   Mon, 13 Sep 2021 13:13:57 -0700
From:   Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:     Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>, Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Xing Zhengjun <zhengjun.xing@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [memcg] 45208c9105: aim7.jobs-per-min -14.0% regression

On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 1:10 PM Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 01:09:11PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > Thanks a lot for the explanation. Are there any concerns to call
> > cgroup_rstat_flush_irqsafe(root_mem_cgroup->css.cgroup) in system_wq?
> > This will be called every 2 seconds, so, we can assume the updated
> > tree would be small most of the time.
>
> I can't think of a reason why this would be problematic.
>

Thanks again.

Feng, is it possible to re-run these benchmarks with
queue_work(system_wq) instead of queue_work(system_unbound_wq)?