From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "karam . lee" <karam.lee@lge.com>,
Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>,
seungho1.park@lge.com, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] remove rw_page() from brd, pmem and btt
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 07:16:59 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170730221659.GA28031@bbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170728142123.729b20e9fcf45c6a814f18e7@linux-foundation.org>
Hi Andrew,
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 02:21:23PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 10:31:43 -0700 Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 10:56:01AM -0600, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> > > Dan Williams and Christoph Hellwig have recently expressed doubt about
> > > whether the rw_page() interface made sense for synchronous memory drivers
> > > [1][2]. It's unclear whether this interface has any performance benefit
> > > for these drivers, but as we continue to fix bugs it is clear that it does
> > > have a maintenance burden. This series removes the rw_page()
> > > implementations in brd, pmem and btt to relieve this burden.
> >
> > Why don't you measure whether it has performance benefits? I don't
> > understand why zram would see performance benefits and not other drivers.
> > If it's going to be removed, then the whole interface should be removed,
> > not just have the implementations removed from some drivers.
>
> Yes please. Minchan, could you please take a look sometime?
rw_page's gain is reducing of dynamic allocation in swap path
as well as performance gain thorugh avoiding bio allocation.
And it would be important in memory pressure situation.
I guess it comes from bio_alloc mempool. Usually, zram-swap works
in high memory pressure so mempool would be exahusted easily.
It means that mempool wait and repeated alloc would consume the
overhead.
Actually, at that time although Karam reported the gain is 2.4%,
I got a report from production team that the gain in corner case
(e.g., animation playing is smooth) would be much higher than
expected.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-30 22:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-28 16:56 [PATCH 0/3] remove rw_page() from brd, pmem and btt Ross Zwisler
2017-07-28 16:56 ` [PATCH 1/3] btt: remove btt_rw_page() Ross Zwisler
2017-08-03 16:15 ` kbuild test robot
2017-07-28 16:56 ` [PATCH 2/3] pmem: remove pmem_rw_page() Ross Zwisler
2017-07-28 16:56 ` [PATCH 3/3] brd: remove brd_rw_page() Ross Zwisler
2017-07-28 17:31 ` [PATCH 0/3] remove rw_page() from brd, pmem and btt Matthew Wilcox
2017-07-28 21:21 ` Andrew Morton
2017-07-30 22:16 ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2017-07-30 22:38 ` Minchan Kim
2017-07-31 7:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-07-31 7:36 ` Minchan Kim
2017-07-31 7:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-07-31 7:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-08-01 6:23 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-02 22:13 ` Ross Zwisler
2017-08-03 0:13 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-03 0:34 ` Dan Williams
2017-08-03 8:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-08-04 0:57 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-03 21:13 ` Ross Zwisler
2017-08-03 21:17 ` Jens Axboe
2017-08-04 3:54 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-04 8:17 ` Minchan Kim
2017-08-04 18:01 ` Dan Williams
2017-08-04 18:21 ` Ross Zwisler
2017-08-04 18:24 ` Dan Williams
2017-08-07 8:23 ` Minchan Kim
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=20170730221659.GA28031@bbox \
--to=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jmarchan@redhat.com \
--cc=karam.lee@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
--cc=ngupta@vflare.org \
--cc=ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com \
--cc=seungho1.park@lge.com \
--cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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