netdev - Re: [net-next 6/6] can: mcp251xfd: mcp251xfd_regmap_crc_read(): work around broken CRC on TBC register

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:   Sun,  9 May 2021 07:46:20 +0000
From:   Patrick Menschel <menschel.p@...teo.de>
To:     Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
Cc:     Drew Fustini <drew@...gleboard.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-can@...r.kernel.org, Will C <will@...china.cc>
Subject: Re: [net-next 6/6] can: mcp251xfd: mcp251xfd_regmap_crc_read(): work
 around broken CRC on TBC register

Am 08.05.21 um 20:36 schrieb Patrick Menschel:
> Am 07.05.21 um 10:25 schrieb Marc Kleine-Budde:
>> On 07.05.2021 08:21:57, Patrick Menschel wrote:
>>>>>> Would it be possible for you to pull these patches into a v5.10 branch
>>>>>> in your linux-rpi repo [1]?
>>>>>
>>>>> Here you are:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/marckleinebudde/linux-rpi/tree/v5.10-rpi/backport-performance-improvements
>>>>>
>>>>> I've included the UINC performance enhancements, too. The branch is compiled
>>>>> tested only, though. I'll send a pull request to the rpi kernel after I've
>>>>> testing feedback from you.
>>>>
>>>> Drew, Patrick, have you tested this branch? If so I'll send a pull
>>>> request to the raspi kernel.
>>>>
>>
>>> not yet. Thanks for reminding me. I'll start a native build on a pi0w asap.
>>>
>>> Is there any test application or stress test that I should run?
>>
>> No, not any particular, do your normal (stress) testing.
>>
> Following up on this.
> 
> ...
> 
> Do I have to change my test?

Hi Marc,

I changed my test to 1 hour and removed the sleep statement.
Still no measurable difference for performance and no CRC Errors with
both kernels.

Apparently the test is hard on the CPU, I have two pytest processes
listed in htop one with 80%CPU and one with 60% CPU, approx 30% ram
usage of 512MB. I have no clue how it reaches the CPU values, there
should be only one CPU on the pi0w.


### 5.10.17+ on pi0w ###

2021-05-09 08:02:56 [    INFO] 725649 frames in 1:00:00
(test_socketcan.py:890)


### 5.10.31-performance-backports+ on pi0w ###

2021-05-09 09:13:32 [    INFO] 715936 frames in 1:00:00
(test_socketcan.py:890)


I'll switch boards to a pi3b and test again with these settings.

Best Regards,
Patrick