netdev - Re: AIM9 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]

Message-Id: <20080923.221831.126801015.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:18:31 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Cc:	cl@...ux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: AIM9 regression

From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 13:12:37 +0800

> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 01:14:27PM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > I just dont seem to be able to get 2.6.27 to behave in a speedy way network
> > wise. Configured out various components (netfilter, etc etc) but I still keep
> > getting these aim9 result against 2.6.22:
> 
> Could you please compare this against something less ancient,
> like 2.6.26 perhaps?

Herbert, this is part of the tbench regression issues.  Christoph
took tbench from 2.6.22 until 2.6.27 and at basically every release
tbench performance suffered noticably.

Now, he's taking the AIM9 benchmark networking numbers and showing
that the same exact effect is seen there too.

It really behooves us to start doing something proactive about this
blindingly obvious set of networking performance regressions through
the past 6 or so releases instead of barking at the reporters saying
things like "try this, try that, what's your config" etc.

:-)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html