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: <20080924.125346.178957726.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:53:46 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	cl@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	shemminger@...tta.com, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: AIM9 regression

From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:10:54 -0500

> Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> 
> > These loopback benchmarks are often more sensitive to scheduler than networking
> > changes.
> 
> Just ran a test with real NICs which show the same issues. I guess I need to
> get familiar with the network stack and start hacking on it. Sigh.

I feel your pain, I think people are being very unreasonable in their
analysis of your numbers, and for this I want to personally apologize.

It's clearly a networking issue in my eyes, and I wish my co-developers
in networking would treat it as such instead of pushing the blame under
the carpet and saying "scheduler", "SLUB", and all kinds of other bullshit
without any facts on this specific case to back up such accusations.
--
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