* [PATCH] mm/zsmalloc: inline obj_malloc() and obj_free()
@ 2026-10-30 12:17 Jenhao Chen
2026-11-05 5:23 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jenhao Chen @ 2026-10-30 12:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Minchan Kim, Sergey Senozhatsky, Andrew Morton
Cc: linux-mm, linux-kernel, llvm, minchan, liumartin, benwei,
Jenhao Chen
In zs_malloc(), the fast path (if (likely(zspage))) allocates from an
existing zspage via obj_malloc(), while the slow path allocates a new
zspage via alloc_zspage().
Because obj_malloc() has three call sites across zs_malloc() and
migrate_zspage(), Clang at -O2 leaves obj_malloc() out-of-line, adding a
function call on every fast-path allocation. Conversely, because the
362-instruction slow-path alloc_zspage() is static with a single caller,
single-caller inlining under CONFIG_AUTOFDO_CLANG (e.g. with
CONFIG_ZSMALLOC=m) inlines alloc_zspage() into zs_malloc(), growing it
from 254 to 691 instructions.
Mark obj_malloc() and obj_free() __always_inline and mark alloc_zspage()
noinline to keep the fast path inline and the slow-path page allocation
out-of-line.
Signed-off-by: Jenhao Chen <jenhaochen@google.com>
---
mm/zsmalloc.c | 13 +++++++------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/zsmalloc.c b/mm/zsmalloc.c
index 6258a4f5e9fce..5d3443f14a48f 100644
--- a/mm/zsmalloc.c
+++ b/mm/zsmalloc.c
@@ -960,9 +960,9 @@ static void create_page_chain(struct size_class *class, struct zspage *zspage,
/*
* Allocate a zspage for the given size class
*/
-static struct zspage *alloc_zspage(struct zs_pool *pool,
- struct size_class *class,
- gfp_t gfp, const int nid)
+static noinline struct zspage *alloc_zspage(struct zs_pool *pool,
+ struct size_class *class,
+ gfp_t gfp, const int nid)
{
int i;
struct zpdesc *zpdescs[ZS_MAX_PAGES_PER_ZSPAGE];
@@ -1209,8 +1209,9 @@ size_t zs_huge_class_size(struct zs_pool *pool)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(zs_huge_class_size);
-static unsigned long obj_malloc(struct zs_pool *pool,
- struct zspage *zspage, unsigned long handle)
+static __always_inline unsigned long obj_malloc(struct zs_pool *pool,
+ struct zspage *zspage,
+ unsigned long handle)
{
int i, nr_zpdesc, offset;
unsigned long obj;
@@ -1321,7 +1322,7 @@ unsigned long zs_malloc(struct zs_pool *pool, size_t size, gfp_t gfp,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(zs_malloc);
-static void obj_free(int class_size, unsigned long obj)
+static __always_inline void obj_free(int class_size, unsigned long obj)
{
struct link_free *link;
struct zspage *zspage;
--
2.56.0.317.g454f8302e1-goog
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mm/zsmalloc: inline obj_malloc() and obj_free()
2026-10-30 12:17 [PATCH] mm/zsmalloc: inline obj_malloc() and obj_free() Jenhao Chen
@ 2026-11-05 5:23 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2026-11-05 10:39 ` Jenhao Chen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Sergey Senozhatsky @ 2026-11-05 5:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jenhao Chen
Cc: Minchan Kim, Sergey Senozhatsky, Andrew Morton, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, llvm, minchan, liumartin, benwei
On (26/10/30 12:17), Jenhao Chen wrote:
> In zs_malloc(), the fast path (if (likely(zspage))) allocates from an
> existing zspage via obj_malloc(), while the slow path allocates a new
> zspage via alloc_zspage().
>
> Because obj_malloc() has three call sites across zs_malloc() and
> migrate_zspage(), Clang at -O2 leaves obj_malloc() out-of-line, adding a
> function call on every fast-path allocation. Conversely, because the
> 362-instruction slow-path alloc_zspage() is static with a single caller,
> single-caller inlining under CONFIG_AUTOFDO_CLANG (e.g. with
> CONFIG_ZSMALLOC=m) inlines alloc_zspage() into zs_malloc(), growing it
> from 254 to 691 instructions.
>
> Mark obj_malloc() and obj_free() __always_inline and mark alloc_zspage()
> noinline to keep the fast path inline and the slow-path page allocation
> out-of-line.
I suppose there is performance benefit?
I guess I don't mind in principle, one thing to note is that this conflicts
with [1].
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/20261105044752.1997895-1-senozhatsky@chromium.org
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mm/zsmalloc: inline obj_malloc() and obj_free()
2026-11-05 5:23 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
@ 2026-11-05 10:39 ` Jenhao Chen
2026-11-05 11:09 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jenhao Chen @ 2026-11-05 10:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sergey Senozhatsky
Cc: Minchan Kim, Andrew Morton, linux-mm, linux-kernel, llvm, minchan,
liumartin, benwei, Jenhao Chen
On (26/11/05 14:23), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> I suppose there is performance benefit?
>
> I guess I don't mind in principle, one thing to note is that this conflicts
> with [1].
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/20261105044752.1997895-1-senozhatsky@chromium.org
Hi Sergey,
Yes -- in a steady-state microbenchmark of paired alloc+write and free
operations across 8 compressed object size classes (384..3136 B):
1. On current mm-new (zs_malloc + zs_obj_write + zs_free):
- Clang 22 -O2: -7.7 (arm64) / -11.8 (x86_64) retired instructions
per pair (-3.2% cycles on x86_64).
- Clang 22 -O2 + CONFIG_AUTOFDO_CLANG: -13.0 (arm64) / -17.5 (x86_64)
retired instructions per pair (-4.8% cycles on x86_64), while
shrinking zs_malloc() from 2,872 B to 1,828 B on arm64 (-36%) and
2,088 B to 1,474 B on x86_64 (-29%).
- GCC 15 -O2 (x86_64, without AutoFDO): GCC leaves both obj_malloc()
(306 B) and obj_free() (120 B) out-of-line while inlining the
single-caller slow path alloc_zspage() into zs_malloc(); the patch
saves -23.7 retired instructions per pair and shrinks zs_malloc()
from 1,738 B to 1,441 B (-17%).
2. Rebased on top of [1] (zs_store + zs_free):
In [PATCH 6/7], the new static obj_write() helper has two call sites
in zs_store(), so both Clang 22 -O2 (360 B on arm64, 219 B on x86_64)
and GCC 15 -O2 (obj_write.isra.0, 229 B on x86_64) leave obj_write()
out-of-line as well. In the zs_store() fast path, obj_malloc() packs
(m_zpdesc, obj, zspage->class) via location_to_obj(), and the
out-of-line obj_write() immediately unpacks obj_to_location(),
recomputes offset_in_page(class->size * obj_idx), and re-checks
!ZsHugePage(zspage).
If we also mark obj_write() __always_inline alongside obj_malloc()
and obj_free() (with noinline on alloc_zspage()), the compiler CSEs
those redundant operations across the fast path:
- arm64 (Clang 22): -31.3 (-O2, -4.0%) / -34.7 (-O2 + AUTOFDO, -4.5%)
retired instructions per zs_store() + zs_free() pair (vs. -8.4 for
obj_malloc() alone), shrinking zs_store() under AUTOFDO from
3,144 B to 2,448 B (-22%).
- x86_64 (Clang 22): -26.6 (-O2) / -31.8 (-O2 + AUTOFDO) retired
instructions per pair (~4.0-4.5% latency reduction).
- x86_64 (GCC 15 -O2): -37.1 retired instructions (-5.1%) and -5.3%
latency (-5.5% cycles) per pair, while keeping zs_store() slightly
smaller (1,997 B -> 1,943 B).
Would you prefer that I send v2 rebased on top of [1] (including
__always_inline on obj_write()), or send v2 against current mm-new
first?
Thanks,
Jenhao
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mm/zsmalloc: inline obj_malloc() and obj_free()
2026-11-05 10:39 ` Jenhao Chen
@ 2026-11-05 11:09 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Sergey Senozhatsky @ 2026-11-05 11:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jenhao Chen
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky, Minchan Kim, Andrew Morton, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, llvm, minchan, liumartin, benwei
On (26/11/05 10:39), Jenhao Chen wrote:
> On (26/11/05 14:23), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > I suppose there is performance benefit?
> >
> > I guess I don't mind in principle, one thing to note is that this conflicts
> > with [1].
> >
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/20261105044752.1997895-1-senozhatsky@chromium.org
>
> Hi Sergey,
Hello,
> Yes -- in a steady-state microbenchmark of paired alloc+write and free
> operations across 8 compressed object size classes (384..3136 B):
>
> 1. On current mm-new (zs_malloc + zs_obj_write + zs_free):
> - Clang 22 -O2: -7.7 (arm64) / -11.8 (x86_64) retired instructions
> per pair (-3.2% cycles on x86_64).
> - Clang 22 -O2 + CONFIG_AUTOFDO_CLANG: -13.0 (arm64) / -17.5 (x86_64)
> retired instructions per pair (-4.8% cycles on x86_64), while
> shrinking zs_malloc() from 2,872 B to 1,828 B on arm64 (-36%) and
> 2,088 B to 1,474 B on x86_64 (-29%).
> - GCC 15 -O2 (x86_64, without AutoFDO): GCC leaves both obj_malloc()
> (306 B) and obj_free() (120 B) out-of-line while inlining the
> single-caller slow path alloc_zspage() into zs_malloc(); the patch
> saves -23.7 retired instructions per pair and shrinks zs_malloc()
> from 1,738 B to 1,441 B (-17%).
Cool.
> 2. Rebased on top of [1] (zs_store + zs_free):
> In [PATCH 6/7], the new static obj_write() helper has two call sites
> in zs_store(), so both Clang 22 -O2 (360 B on arm64, 219 B on x86_64)
> and GCC 15 -O2 (obj_write.isra.0, 229 B on x86_64) leave obj_write()
> out-of-line as well. In the zs_store() fast path, obj_malloc() packs
> (m_zpdesc, obj, zspage->class) via location_to_obj(), and the
> out-of-line obj_write() immediately unpacks obj_to_location(),
> recomputes offset_in_page(class->size * obj_idx), and re-checks
> !ZsHugePage(zspage).
>
> If we also mark obj_write() __always_inline alongside obj_malloc()
> and obj_free() (with noinline on alloc_zspage()), the compiler CSEs
> those redundant operations across the fast path:
> - arm64 (Clang 22): -31.3 (-O2, -4.0%) / -34.7 (-O2 + AUTOFDO, -4.5%)
> retired instructions per zs_store() + zs_free() pair (vs. -8.4 for
> obj_malloc() alone), shrinking zs_store() under AUTOFDO from
> 3,144 B to 2,448 B (-22%).
> - x86_64 (Clang 22): -26.6 (-O2) / -31.8 (-O2 + AUTOFDO) retired
> instructions per pair (~4.0-4.5% latency reduction).
> - x86_64 (GCC 15 -O2): -37.1 retired instructions (-5.1%) and -5.3%
> latency (-5.5% cycles) per pair, while keeping zs_store() slightly
> smaller (1,997 B -> 1,943 B).
Great, I'd love to see that in v2 commit message.
> Would you prefer that I send v2 rebased on top of [1] (including
> __always_inline on obj_write()), or send v2 against current mm-new
> first?
If it doesn't trouble you too much, can we finalize [1] first so then
you can send your patch atop of it? I can ping you when [1] is done.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-11-05 11:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-10-30 12:17 [PATCH] mm/zsmalloc: inline obj_malloc() and obj_free() Jenhao Chen
2026-11-05 5:23 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2026-11-05 10:39 ` Jenhao Chen
2026-11-05 11:09 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox