[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5211B608.2050401@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:07:04 +0800
From: Bob Liu <bob.liu@...cle.com>
To: Luigi Semenzato <semenzato@...gle.com>
CC: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nok.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...gle.com>,
Stephen Barber <smbarber@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/5] zram/zsmalloc promotion
Hi Luigi,
On 08/19/2013 01:29 PM, Luigi Semenzato wrote:
>
> We are gearing up to evaluate zswap, but we have only ported kernels
> up to 3.8 to our hardware, so we may be missing important patches.
>
> In our experience, and with all due respect, the linux MM is a complex
> beast, and it's difficult to predict how hard it will be for us to
> switch to zswap. Even with the relatively simple zram, our load
I think it will be easy if zswap can also create a pseudo block device(I
already done the simple implementation [PATCH 0/4] mm: merge zram into
zswap), then it's transparent for original zram users.
> triggered bugs in other parts of the MM that took a fair amount of
> work to resolve.
>
> I may be wrong, but the in-memory compressed block device implemented
> by zram seems like a simple device which uses a well-established API
> to the rest of the kernel. If it is removed from the kernel, will it
> be difficult for us to carry our own patch? Because we may have to do
> that for a while. Of course we would prefer it if it stayed in, at
> least temporarily.
>
> Also, could someone confirm or deny that the maximum compression ratio
> in zbud is 2? Because we easily achieve a 2.6-2.8 compression ratio
> with our loads using zram with zsmalloc and LZO or snappy. Losing
> that memory will cause a noticeable regression, which will encourage
> us to stick with zram.
>
> I am hoping that our load is not so unusual that we are the only Linux
> users in this situation, and that zsmalloc (or other
> allocator-compressor with similar characteristics) will continue to
> exist, whether it is used by zram or zswap.
>
> Thanks!
>
--
Regards,
-Bob
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists