Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 11 Feb 2018 20:13:12 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/31 v2] PTI support for x86_32 |
| |
* Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de> wrote:
> Hi Andy, > > On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 05:47:43PM +0000, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > One thing worth noting is that performance of this whole series is > > going to be abysmal due to the complete lack of 32-bit PCID. Maybe > > any kernel built with this option set that runs on a CPU that has the > > PCID bit set in CPUID should print a big fat warning like "WARNING: > > you are using 32-bit PTI on a 64-bit PCID-capable CPU. Your > > performance will increase dramatically if you switch to a 64-bit > > kernel." > > Thanks for your review. I can add this warning, but I just hope that not > a lot of people will actually see it :)
Could you please measure the PTI kernel vs. vanilla kernel?
Nothing complex, just perf's built-in scheduler and syscall benchmark should be enough:
perf stat --null --sync --repeat 10 perf bench sched messaging -g 20
this should give us a pretty good worst-case overhead figure for process workloads.
Add '-t' to test threaded workloads as well:
perf stat --null --sync --repeat 10 perf bench sched messaging -g 20 -t
The 10 runs used should be enough to reach good stability in practice:
Performance counter stats for 'perf bench sched messaging -g 20 -t' (10 runs):
0.380742219 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.73% )
Maybe do the same on the 64-bit kernel as well, so that we have 4 good data points on the same hardware?
Thanks,
Ingo
|  |