linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] locking/osq_lock: The numa-aware lock memory prepare, assign and cleanup.

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9836c30e-4ee1-485a-83f2-b38630dd7c21@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2024 07:28:00 -0400
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: yongli-os <yongli-oc@...oxin.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
 mingo@...hat.com, will@...nel.org, boqun.feng@...il.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yongli@...oxin.com, louisqi@...oxin.com,
 cobechen@...oxin.com, jiangbowang@...oxin.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] locking/osq_lock: The numa-aware lock memory prepare,
 assign and cleanup.

On 9/19/24 05:41, yongli-os wrote:
> BTW, your patch series lacks performance data to justify the addition of
>
>> quite a lot of complexity to the core locking code. We are unlikely to
>> take this without sufficient justification.
>>
> In the cover letter,  these is performance test result for AMD EPYC 
> 7551 and
>
> Zhaoxin KH40000. I listed the perf epoll, locktorture mutex, unixbench 
> and fxmark.
>
> What test do you think is important for the Lock performance?
>
> I will do more test in next submission.

Ah, I was not sent to/cc on the cover-letter. I only got your patches 
1-4. Yes, you did sent out a cover letter with some performance numbers 
after checking the LKML list. I will take a closer look at these 
performance numbers later as I am attending the LPC conference this week.

Cheers,
Longman