From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] zram: introduce per-device debug_stat sysfs node
Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 16:41:05 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160513074105.GD615@swordfish> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160513072006.GA21484@bbox>
On (05/13/16 16:20), Minchan Kim wrote:
[..]
> > here I assume that the biggest contributor to re-compress latency is
> > enabled preemption after zcomp_strm_release() and this second zs_malloc().
> > the compression itself of a PAGE_SIZE buffer should be fast enough. so IOW
> > we would pass down the slow path, but would not account it.
>
> biggest contributors are 1. direct reclaim by second zsmalloc call +
> 2. recompression overhead.
3. enabled preemption after zcomp_strm_release()
we can be scheduled out for a long time.
> If zram start to support high comp ratio but slow speed algorithm like zlib
> 2 might be higher than 1 in the future so let's not ignore 2 overhead.
hm, yes, good point. not arguing, just for notice -- 2) has an upper limit
on its complexity, because we basically just do a number of arithmetical
operations on a buffer that has upper size limit -- PAGE_SIZE; while reclaim
in zsmalloc() can last an arbitrary amount of time. that's why I tend to
think of a PAGE_SIZE compression contribution as of constant, that can be
ignored.
> Although 2 is smaller, your patch just accounts only direct reclaim but my
> suggestion can count both 1 and 2 so isn't it better?
>
> I don't know why it's arguable here. :)
no objections to put it next to goto. just making sure that we have
considered all the possibilities and cases.
will resend shortly, thanks!
-ss
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-13 7:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-11 13:45 [PATCH] zram: introduce per-device debug_stat sysfs node Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-05-12 23:41 ` Minchan Kim
2016-05-13 1:09 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-05-13 6:23 ` Minchan Kim
2016-05-13 6:58 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-05-13 7:05 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-05-13 7:20 ` Minchan Kim
2016-05-13 7:41 ` Sergey Senozhatsky [this message]
2016-05-13 8:06 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2016-05-13 23:05 ` Minchan Kim
2016-05-14 3:37 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
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=20160513074105.GD615@swordfish \
--to=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).