netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/6] selftests: tc-testing: cap parallel tdc to 4 cores

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20231120173823.GF245676@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 17:38:23 +0000
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Pedro Tammela <pctammela@...atatu.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, jhs@...atatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
	jiri@...nulli.us, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
	kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, shuah@...nel.org,
	victor@...atatu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/6] selftests: tc-testing: cap parallel tdc to
 4 cores

On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 02:12:03PM -0300, Pedro Tammela wrote:
> We have observed a lot of lock contention and test instability when running with >8 cores.
> Enough to actually make the tests run slower than with fewer cores.
> 
> Cap the maximum cores of parallel tdc to 4 which showed in testing to
> be a reasonable number for efficiency and stability in different kernel
> config scenarios.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pedro Tammela <pctammela@...atatu.com>

Hi Pedro,

This limit seems a bit unfortunate, because it seems dependent on
hardware and software details that are subject to change. Meanwhile
this patch will be long since forgotten. But, OTOH, I can't think of
a better idea at this time, so:

Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>

...