linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 31/35] lib: add memory allocations report in show

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: <CAJuCfpE9gys=A8A+A9ie92uJXLeYVNyZGGVgxizjEjmRGtjdvg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 17:31:41 -0800
From: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
To: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, 
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hannes@...xchg.org, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, 
	mgorman@...e.de, dave@...olabs.net, willy@...radead.org, 
	liam.howlett@...cle.com, corbet@....net, void@...ifault.com, 
	peterz@...radead.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com, catalin.marinas@....com, 
	will@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, 
	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, peterx@...hat.com, 
	david@...hat.com, axboe@...nel.dk, mcgrof@...nel.org, masahiroy@...nel.org, 
	nathan@...nel.org, dennis@...nel.org, tj@...nel.org, muchun.song@...ux.dev, 
	rppt@...nel.org, paulmck@...nel.org, pasha.tatashin@...een.com, 
	yosryahmed@...gle.com, yuzhao@...gle.com, dhowells@...hat.com, 
	hughd@...gle.com, andreyknvl@...il.com, keescook@...omium.org, 
	ndesaulniers@...gle.com, vvvvvv@...gle.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, 
	ebiggers@...gle.com, ytcoode@...il.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org, 
	dietmar.eggemann@....com, bsegall@...gle.com, bristot@...hat.com, 
	vschneid@...hat.com, cl@...ux.com, penberg@...nel.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, 
	42.hyeyoo@...il.com, glider@...gle.com, elver@...gle.com, dvyukov@...gle.com, 
	shakeelb@...gle.com, songmuchun@...edance.com, jbaron@...mai.com, 
	rientjes@...gle.com, minchan@...gle.com, kaleshsingh@...gle.com, 
	kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev, 
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, 
	linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, 
	cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 31/35] lib: add memory allocations report in show_mem()

On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 5:18 PM Kent Overstreet
<kent.overstreet@...ux.dev> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 08:12:39PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 19:50:24 -0500
> > Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev> wrote:
> >
> > > > All nice, but where are the benchmarks? This looks like it will have an
> > > > affect on cache and you can talk all you want about how it will not be an
> > > > issue, but without real world benchmarks, it's meaningless. Numbers talk.
> > >
> > > Steve, you're being demanding. We provided sufficient benchmarks to show
> > > the overhead is low enough for production, and then I gave you a
> > > detailed breakdown of where our overhead is and where it'll show up. I
> > > think that's reasonable.
> >
> > It's not unreasonable or demanding to ask for benchmarks. You showed only
> > micro-benchmarks that do not show how cache misses may affect the system.
> > Honestly, it sounds like you did run other benchmarks and didn't like the
> > results and are fighting to not have to produce them. Really, how hard is
> > it? There's lots of benchmarks you can run, like hackbench, stress-ng,
> > dbench. Why is this so difficult for you?

I'll run these benchmarks and will include the numbers in the next cover letter.


>
> Woah, this is verging into paranoid conspiracy territory.
>
> No, we haven't done other benchmarks, and if we had we'd be sharing
> them. And if I had more time to spend on performance of this patchset
> that's not where I'd be spending it; the next thing I'd be looking at
> would be assembly output of the hooking code and seeing if I could shave
> that down.
>
> But I already put a ton of work into shaving cycles on this patchset,
> I'm happy with the results, and I have other responsibilities and other
> things I need to be working on.