From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 742DBCA9EAF for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 02:51:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E92A21929 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 02:51:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2391102AbfJYCvB (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Oct 2019 22:51:01 -0400 Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.189]:2065 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732696AbfJYCvA (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Oct 2019 22:51:00 -0400 Received: from DGGEMM405-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.57]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 4208DBF4F971B1226BAC; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 10:50:56 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.108) by DGGEMM405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.20.213) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 10:50:44 +0800 Received: from architecture4 (10.140.130.215) by dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 10:50:44 +0800 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 10:53:35 +0800 From: Gao Xiang To: Philippe Liard CC: , , , , Chao Yu Subject: Re: [PATCH] squashfs: Migrate from ll_rw_block usage to BIO Message-ID: <20191025025334.GA210047@architecture4> References: <20191018010846.186484-1-pliard@google.com> <20191025004531.89978-1-pliard@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191025004531.89978-1-pliard@google.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Originating-IP: [10.140.130.215] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggeme706-chm.china.huawei.com (10.1.199.102) To dggeme762-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.108) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 09:45:31AM +0900, Philippe Liard wrote: > > Personally speaking, just for Android related use cases, I'd suggest > > latest EROFS if you care more about system overall performance more > > than compression ratio, even https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/22/814 is > > applied (you can do benchmark), we did much efforts 3 years ago. > > > > And that is not only performance but noticable memory overhead (a lot > > of extra memory allocations) and heavy page cache thrashing in low > > memory scenarios (it's very common [1].) > > Thanks for the suggestion. EROFS is on our radar and we will > (re)consider it once it goes out of staging. But we will most likely > stay on squashfs until this happens. EROFS is already out of staging in mainline right now, https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/erofs/ If you agree on that, I'd suggest you try it right now since it's widely (200+ million devices on the market) deployed for our Android smartphones and fully open source and open community. I think this is not a regrettable attempt and we can response any question. https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191024033259.GA2513@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1 In my personal opinion, just for Android use cases, I think it is worth taking some time. Thanks, Gao Xiang