netdev - Re: kmem accounting netperf data

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20121120235224.f4e9e1c6.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 20 Nov 2012 23:52:24 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>
Cc:	glommer@...allels.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kmem accounting netperf data

On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:03:52 -0800 Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com> wrote:

> We ran some netperf comparisons measuring the overhead of enabling
> CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM with a kmem limit.  Short answer: no regression seen.
> 
> This is a multiple machine (client,server) netperf test.  Both client
> and server machines were running the same kernel with the same
> configuration.
> 
> A baseline run (with CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM unset) was compared with a full
> featured run (CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM=y and a kmem limit large enough not to
> put additional pressure on the workload).  We saw no noticeable
> regression running:
> - TCP_CRR efficiency, latency
> - TCP_RR latency, rate
> - TCP_STREAM efficiency, throughput
> - UDP_RR efficiency, latency
> The tests were run with a varying number of concurrent connections
> (between 1 and 200).
> 
> The source came from one of Glauber's branches
> (git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/glommer/memcg
> kmemcg-slab):
>   commit 70506dcf756aaafd92f4a34752d6b8d8ff4ed360
>   Author: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
>   Date:   Thu Aug 16 17:16:21 2012 +0400
> 
>       Add slab-specific documentation about the kmem controller
> 
> It's not the latest source, but I figured the data might still be
> useful.

Let's cc the netdev guys, who will be pleased to hear that we didn't
break their stuff for once ;)

Thanks for testing - it was a concern.
--
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