linux-kernel - Re: zsmalloc defrag (Was: [PATCH] mm: remove compressed copy from zram in-memory)

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

Message-ID: <51647F94.6000907@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Tue, 09 Apr 2013 15:52:36 -0500
From:	Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
CC:	Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nok.org>,
	Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>, Bob Liu <bob.liu@...cle.com>,
	Shuah Khan <shuah@...ehiking.org>
Subject: Re: zsmalloc defrag (Was: [PATCH] mm: remove compressed copy from
 zram in-memory)

On 04/08/2013 08:36 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 10:27:19AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
>> Hi Dan,
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 09:32:38AM -0700, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
>>>> From: Minchan Kim [mailto:minchan@...nel.org]
>>>> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 12:01 AM
>>>> Subject: [PATCH] mm: remove compressed copy from zram in-memory
>>>
>>> (patch removed)
>>>
>>>> Fragment ratio is almost same but memory consumption and compile time
>>>> is better. I am working to add defragment function of zsmalloc.
>>>
>>> Hi Minchan --
>>>
>>> I would be very interested in your design thoughts on
>>> how you plan to add defragmentation for zsmalloc.  In
>>
>> What I can say now about is only just a word "Compaction".
>> As you know, zsmalloc has a transparent handle so we can do whatever
>> under user. Of course, there is a tradeoff between performance 
>> and memory efficiency. I'm biased to latter for embedded usecase.
>>
>> And I might post it because as you know well, zsmalloc
> 
> Incomplete sentense,
> 
> I might not post it until promoting zsmalloc because as you know well,
> zsmalloc/zram's all new stuffs are blocked into staging tree.
> Even if we could add it into staging, as you know well, staging is where
> every mm guys ignore so we end up needing another round to promote it. sigh.

Yes. The lack of compaction/defragmentation support in zsmalloc has not
been raised as an obstacle to mainline acceptance so I think we should
wait to add new features to a yet-to-be accepted codebase.

Also, I think this feature is more important to zram than it is to
zswap/zcache as they can do writeback to free zpages.  In other words,
the fragmentation is a transient issue for zswap/zcache since writeback
to the swap device is possible.

Thanks,
Seth

--
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/