From: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
To: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
hdanton@sina.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, minchan@kernel.org, ryncsn@gmail.com,
yosry.ahmed@linux.dev, surenb@google.com,
Dongdong Zhang <zhangdongdong5@xiaomi.com>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] zram: avoid preemption with CPU-based compression backends
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2026 17:46:02 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <anL0utxGYeGOGwjt@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGsJ_4xU5VN3abCPzACZoS92MqaUrMHn9EQ1FCJD+wy=upbbMA@mail.gmail.com>
On (26/08/05 15:50), Barry Song wrote:
> > > talked with our engineers reporting the issue. i believe it is all
> > > about priority inversion.
> > > proxy execution wont resolve it as we have a sleepable zs-malloc
> > > within the mutex.
> > > i believe i need v2 to release the mutex before doing the 2nd stage
> > > zs_malloc with
> > > direct reclaim.
> >
> > Well, we cannot just drop the stream mutex and do sleepable zsmalloc
> > allocation, because this will invalidate compression buffer. So we
> > then will need to do re-compression. Something that I was really
> > happy to drop [1].
>
[..]
> BTW, I wonder if compression and decompression could use separate
> mutexes. That way, a sleepable zs_malloc() in the compression path
> would not block decompression, which is the more latency-sensitive
> operation.
This sounds interesting. I think all of the S/W backends that we use
have stateless decompression, so we probably can just split per-CPU
stream mutex for R and W paths w/o the need for any additional scratch
buffers. Wanna give it a try?
Back to preemption:
Is there maybe a common hot preemption point where stream mutex owners
get scheduled out? E.g. inside zs_malloc()?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-05 8:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-05 0:55 [RFC PATCH] zram: avoid preemption with CPU-based compression backends Barry Song (Xiaomi)
2026-08-05 1:27 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2026-08-05 1:57 ` Barry Song
2026-08-05 2:09 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2026-08-05 5:09 ` Barry Song
2026-08-05 5:21 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2026-08-05 7:50 ` Barry Song
2026-08-05 8:46 ` Sergey Senozhatsky [this message]
2026-08-05 9:01 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2026-08-05 10:07 ` Barry Song (Xiaomi)
2026-08-05 10:25 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2026-08-05 10:34 ` Barry Song
2026-08-05 10:37 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2026-08-05 2:19 ` Bo Zhang
2026-08-05 2:31 ` Barry Song
2026-08-05 7:30 ` 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=anL0utxGYeGOGwjt@google.com \
--to=senozhatsky@chromium.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=hdanton@sina.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=ryncsn@gmail.com \
--cc=suleiman@google.com \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=yosry.ahmed@linux.dev \
--cc=zhangdongdong5@xiaomi.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