From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx178.postini.com [74.125.245.178]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 278AF6B005D for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 03:03:12 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4FFD2524.2050300@kernel.org> Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 16:03:00 +0900 From: Minchan Kim MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] zsmalloc improvements References: <1341263752-10210-1-git-send-email-sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <1341263752-10210-1-git-send-email-sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Seth Jennings Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Andrew Morton , Dan Magenheimer , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Nitin Gupta , Robert Jennings , linux-mm@kvack.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi everybody, I realized it by Seth's mention yesterday that Greg already merged this series I should have hurried but last week I have no time. :( On 07/03/2012 06:15 AM, Seth Jennings wrote: > This patchset removes the current x86 dependency for zsmalloc > and introduces some performance improvements in the object > mapping paths. > > It was meant to be a follow-on to my previous patchest > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/6/26/540 > > However, this patchset differed so much in light of new performance > information that I mostly started over. > > In the past, I attempted to compare different mapping methods > via the use of zcache and frontswap. However, the nature of those > two features makes comparing mapping method efficiency difficult > since the mapping is a very small part of the overall code path. > > In an effort to get more useful statistics on the mapping speed, > I wrote a microbenchmark module named zsmapbench, designed to > measure mapping speed by calling straight into the zsmalloc > paths. > > https://github.com/spartacus06/zsmapbench > > This exposed an interesting and unexpected result: in all > cases that I tried, copying the objects that span pages instead > of using the page table to map them, was _always_ faster. I could > not find a case in which the page table mapping method was faster. > > zsmapbench measures the copy-based mapping at ~560 cycles for a > map/unmap operation on spanned object for both KVM guest and bare-metal, > while the page table mapping was ~1500 cycles on a VM and ~760 cycles > bare-metal. The cycles for the copy method will vary with > allocation size, however, it is still faster even for the largest > allocation that zsmalloc supports. > > The result is convenient though, as mempcy is very portable :) Today, I tested zsmapbench in my embedded board(ARM). tlb-flush is 30% faster than copy-based so it's always not win. I think it depends on CPU speed/cache size. zram is already very popular on embedded systems so I want to use it continuously without 30% big demage so I want to keep our old approach which supporting local tlb flush. Of course, in case of KVM guest, copy-based would be always bin win. So shouldn't we support both approach? It could make code very ugly but I think it has enough value. Any thought? > > This patchset replaces the x86-only page table mapping code with > copy-based mapping code. It also makes changes to optimize this > new method further. > > There are no changes in arch/x86 required. > > Patchset is based on greg's staging-next. > > Seth Jennings (4): > zsmalloc: remove x86 dependency > zsmalloc: add single-page object fastpath in unmap > zsmalloc: add details to zs_map_object boiler plate > zsmalloc: add mapping modes > > drivers/staging/zcache/zcache-main.c | 6 +- > drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c | 7 +- > drivers/staging/zsmalloc/Kconfig | 4 - > drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc-main.c | 124 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------- > drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc.h | 14 +++- > drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc_int.h | 6 +- > 6 files changed, 114 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-) > -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- 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: email@kvack.org