netdev - Re: Netperf TCP_RR(loopback) 10% regression in 2.6.24-rc6, comparing with 2.6.22

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, 14 Jan 2008 11:21:17 +0200 (EET)
From:	"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
To:	"Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>
cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Netperf TCP_RR(loopback) 10% regression in 2.6.24-rc6,	comparing
 with 2.6.22

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Jan 2008, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 17:35 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: 
> > > 
> > > As a matter of fact, 2.6.23 has about 6% regression and 2.6.24-rc's
> > > regression is between 16%~11%.
> > > 
> > > I tried to use bisect to locate the bad patch between 2.6.22 and 2.6.23-rc1,
> > > but the bisected kernel wasn't stable and went crazy.
> 
> TCP work between that is very much non-existing.

I _really_ meant 2.6.22 - 2.6.23-rc1, not 2.6.24-rc1 in case you had a 
typo there which is not that uncommon while typing kernel versions... :-)

-- 
 i.