From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
To: Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>, Tony Jones <tonyj@suse.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] audit: Reduce overhead using a coarse clock
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2017 17:53:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170704165308.ls4i5qa4sz6cpn5x@techsingularity.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABeXuvojLcAzBXLjcdtt8Dii_mUqO=Kc5iJzQOKzP3aU8p5ApA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 09:23:55AM -0700, Deepa Dinamani wrote:
> > The patch in question has no explanation as to why a fully-accurate timestamp
> > is required and is likely an oversight. Using a coarser, but monotically
> > increasing, timestamp the overhead can be eliminated.
>
> You are right. I was trying to use ktime_get* functions preferably.
> I was aware that current_kernel_time64() could also be used if lesser
> granularity was preferred and that it was faster.
> I forgot to note that in the commit text.
>
Given the severe overhead (roughly 10% to redis, sysbench-threads), would
you be willing to accept the coarser granularity to avoid audit taking
a major performance hit? I didn't mention it in my own changelog but a
similar 10% hit is also visible in the will-it-scale microbenchmarks that
focus on system calls so it's a fairly broad impact.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-04 16:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-04 12:11 Mel Gorman
2017-07-04 16:23 ` Deepa Dinamani
2017-07-04 16:53 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2017-07-04 19:20 ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-07-04 19:41 ` Deepa Dinamani
2017-07-06 20:25 ` Paul Moore
2017-07-06 23:31 ` Mel Gorman
2017-07-10 14:43 ` Richard Guy Briggs
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170704165308.ls4i5qa4sz6cpn5x@techsingularity.net \
--to=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=deepa.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=rgb@redhat.com \
--cc=tonyj@suse.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®