linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv6 0/8] zswap: compressed swap caching

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 01 May 2013 16:06:52 +0800
From:	Ric Mason <ric.masonn@...il.com>
To:	Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:	Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
	Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Robert Jennings <rcj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Jenifer Hopper <jhopper@...ibm.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Johannes Weiner <jweiner@...hat.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
	Cody P Schafer <cody@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv6 0/8] zswap: compressed swap caching

Hi Seth,
On 02/22/2013 02:25 AM, Seth Jennings wrote:
> On 02/21/2013 09:50 AM, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
>>> From: Seth Jennings [mailto:sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com]
>>> Subject: [PATCHv6 0/8] zswap: compressed swap caching
>>>
>>> Changelog:
>>>
>>> v6:
>>> * fix improper freeing of rbtree (Cody)
>> Cody's bug fix reminded me of a rather fundamental question:
>>
>> Why does zswap use a rbtree instead of a radix tree?
>>
>> Intuitively, I'd expect that pgoff_t values would
>> have a relatively high level of locality AND at any one time
>> the set of stored pgoff_t values would be relatively non-sparse.
>> This would argue that a radix tree would result in fewer nodes
>> touched on average for lookup/insert/remove.
> I considered using a radix tree, but I don't think there is a compelling
> reason to choose a radix tree over a red-black tree in this case
> (explanation below).
>
>  From a runtime standpoint, a radix tree might be faster.  The swap
> offsets will be largely in linearly bunched groups over the indexed
> range.  However, there are also memory constraints to consider in this
> particular situation.
>
> Using a radix tree could result in intermediate radix_tree_node
> allocations in the store (insert) path in addition to the zswap_entry
> allocation.  Since we are under memory pressure, using the red-black

Then in which case radix tree is prefer and in which case redblack tree 
is better?

> tree, whose metadata is included in the struct zswap_entry, reduces the
> number of opportunities to fail.
>
> On my system, the radix_tree_node structure is 568 bytes.  The
> radix_tree_node cache requires 4 pages per slab, an order-2 page
> allocation.  Growing that cache will be difficult under the pressure.
>
> In my mind, cost of even a single node allocation failure resulting in
> an additional page swapped to disk will more that wipe out any possible
> performance advantage using a radix tree might have.
>
> Thanks,
> Seth
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@...ck.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@...ck.org"> email@...ck.org </a>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/