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  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]
Date:	Fri, 25 Jul 2014 12:59:05 -0400
From:	Dan Streetman <ddstreet@...e.org>
To:	Seth Jennings <sjennings@...iantweb.net>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Bob Liu <bob.liu@...cle.com>, Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
	Weijie Yang <weijie.yang@...sung.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 0/4] mm/zpool: add common api for zswap to use zbud/zsmalloc

Hey Seth,

have a chance to test yet?

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 6:00 PM, Seth Jennings <sjennings@...iantweb.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:05:45PM -0400, Dan Streetman wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Seth Jennings <sjennings@...iantweb.net> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 02:10:42PM -0400, Dan Streetman wrote:
>> >> Andrew, any thoughts on this latest version of the patch set?  Let me
>> >> know if I missed anything or you have any other suggestions.
>> >>
>> >> Seth, did you get a chance to review this and/or test it out?
>> >
>> > I did have a chance to test it out quickly and didn't run into any
>> > issues.  Your patchset is already in linux-next so I'll test more from
>> > there.
>>
>> This latest version has a few changes that Andrew requested, which
>> presumably will replace the patches that are currently in -mm and
>> -next; can you test with these patches instead of (or in addition to)
>> what's in -next?
>
> Looks like Andrew just did the legwork for me to get the new patches
> into mmotm.  When the hit there (tomorrow?), I'll put it down and test
> with that.
>
> Thanks,
> Seth
>
>>
>> >
>> > Seth
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 5:45 PM, Dan Streetman <ddstreet@...e.org> wrote:
>> >> > In order to allow zswap users to choose between zbud and zsmalloc for
>> >> > the compressed storage pool, this patch set adds a new api "zpool" that
>> >> > provides an interface to both zbud and zsmalloc.  This does not include
>> >> > implementing shrinking in zsmalloc, which will be sent separately.
>> >> >
>> >> > I believe Seth originally was using zsmalloc for swap, but there were
>> >> > concerns about how significant the impact of shrinking zsmalloc would
>> >> > be when zswap had to start reclaiming pages.  That still may be an
>> >> > issue, but this at least allows users to choose themselves whether
>> >> > they want a lower-density or higher-density compressed storage medium.
>> >> > At least for situations where zswap reclaim is never or rarely reached,
>> >> > it probably makes sense to use the higher density of zsmalloc.
>> >> >
>> >> > Note this patch set does not change zram to use zpool, although that
>> >> > change should be possible as well.
>> >> >
>> >> > ---
>> >> > Changes since v4 : https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/2/711
>> >> >   -omit first patch, that removed gfp_t param from zpool_malloc()
>> >> >   -move function doc from zpool.h to zpool.c
>> >> >   -move module usage refcounting into patch that adds zpool
>> >> >   -add extra refcounting to prevent driver unregister if in use
>> >> >   -add doc clarifying concurrency usage
>> >> >   -make zbud/zsmalloc zpool functions static
>> >> >   -typo corrections
>> >> >
>> >> > Changes since v3 : https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/24/130
>> >> >   -In zpool_shrink() use # pages instead of # bytes
>> >> >   -Add reclaimed param to zpool_shrink() to indicate to caller
>> >> >    # pages actually reclaimed
>> >> >   -move module usage counting to zpool, from zbud/zsmalloc
>> >> >   -update zbud_zpool_shrink() to call zbud_reclaim_page() in a
>> >> >    loop until requested # pages have been reclaimed (or error)
>> >> >
>> >> > Changes since v2 : https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/7/927
>> >> >   -Change zpool to use driver registration instead of hardcoding
>> >> >    implementations
>> >> >   -Add module use counting in zbud/zsmalloc
>> >> >
>> >> > Changes since v1 https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/19/97
>> >> >  -remove zsmalloc shrinking
>> >> >  -change zbud size param type from unsigned int to size_t
>> >> >  -remove zpool fallback creation
>> >> >  -zswap manually falls back to zbud if specified type fails
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Dan Streetman (4):
>> >> >   mm/zbud: change zbud_alloc size type to size_t
>> >> >   mm/zpool: implement common zpool api to zbud/zsmalloc
>> >> >   mm/zpool: zbud/zsmalloc implement zpool
>> >> >   mm/zpool: update zswap to use zpool
>> >> >
>> >> >  include/linux/zbud.h  |   2 +-
>> >> >  include/linux/zpool.h | 106 +++++++++++++++
>> >> >  mm/Kconfig            |  43 +++---
>> >> >  mm/Makefile           |   1 +
>> >> >  mm/zbud.c             |  98 +++++++++++++-
>> >> >  mm/zpool.c            | 364 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> >> >  mm/zsmalloc.c         |  84 ++++++++++++
>> >> >  mm/zswap.c            |  75 ++++++-----
>> >> >  8 files changed, 722 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
>> >> >  create mode 100644 include/linux/zpool.h
>> >> >  create mode 100644 mm/zpool.c
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > 1.8.3.1
>> >> >
--
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