| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 14:44:26 +0900
From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@....com>
To: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@...hat.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, juno.choi@....com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Dan Streetman <ddstreet@...e.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Luigi Semenzato <semenzato@...gle.com>,
"seungho1.park" <seungho1.park@....com>,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] zsmalloc: merge size_class to reduce fragmentation
On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 02:39:49PM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 08:10:22AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > Hey Joonsoo,
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 04:45:27PM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > > zsmalloc has many size_classes to reduce fragmentation and they are
> > > in 16 bytes unit, for example, 16, 32, 48, etc., if PAGE_SIZE is 4096.
> > > And, zsmalloc has constraint that each zspage has 4 pages at maximum.
> > >
> > > In this situation, we can see interesting aspect.
> > > Let's think about size_class for 1488, 1472, ..., 1376.
> > > To prevent external fragmentation, they uses 4 pages per zspage and
> > > so all they can contain 11 objects at maximum.
> > >
> > > 16384 (4096 * 4) = 1488 * 11 + remains
> > > 16384 (4096 * 4) = 1472 * 11 + remains
> > > 16384 (4096 * 4) = ...
> > > 16384 (4096 * 4) = 1376 * 11 + remains
> > >
> > > It means that they have same characteristics and classification between
> > > them isn't needed. If we use one size_class for them, we can reduce
> > > fragementation and save some memory since both the 1488 and 1472 sized
> > > classes can only fit 11 objects into 4 pages, and an object that's
> > > 1472 bytes can fit into an object that's 1488 bytes, merging these
> > > classes to always use objects that are 1488 bytes will reduce the total
> > > number of size classes. And reducing the total number of size classes
> > > reduces overall fragmentation, because a wider range of compressed pages
> > > can fit into a single size class, leaving less unused objects in each
> > > size class.
> > >
> > > For this purpose, this patch implement size_class merging. If there is
> > > size_class that have same pages_per_zspage and same number of objects
> > > per zspage with previous size_class, we don't create new size_class.
> > > Instead, we use previous, same characteristic size_class. With this way,
> > > above example sizes (1488, 1472, ..., 1376) use just one size_class
> > > so we can get much more memory utilization.
> > >
> > > Below is result of my simple test.
> > >
> > > TEST ENV: EXT4 on zram, mount with discard option
> > > WORKLOAD: untar kernel source code, remove directory in descending order
> > > in size. (drivers arch fs sound include net Documentation firmware
> > > kernel tools)
> > >
> > > Each line represents orig_data_size, compr_data_size, mem_used_total,
> > > fragmentation overhead (mem_used - compr_data_size) and overhead ratio
> > > (overhead to compr_data_size), respectively, after untar and remove
> > > operation is executed.
> > >
> > > * untar-nomerge.out
> > >
> > > orig_size compr_size used_size overhead overhead_ratio
> > > 525.88MB 199.16MB 210.23MB 11.08MB 5.56%
> > > 288.32MB 97.43MB 105.63MB 8.20MB 8.41%
> > > 177.32MB 61.12MB 69.40MB 8.28MB 13.55%
> > > 146.47MB 47.32MB 56.10MB 8.78MB 18.55%
> > > 124.16MB 38.85MB 48.41MB 9.55MB 24.58%
> > > 103.93MB 31.68MB 40.93MB 9.25MB 29.21%
> > > 84.34MB 22.86MB 32.72MB 9.86MB 43.13%
> > > 66.87MB 14.83MB 23.83MB 9.00MB 60.70%
> > > 60.67MB 11.11MB 18.60MB 7.49MB 67.48%
> > > 55.86MB 8.83MB 16.61MB 7.77MB 88.03%
> > > 53.32MB 8.01MB 15.32MB 7.31MB 91.24%
> > >
> > > * untar-merge.out
> > >
> > > orig_size compr_size used_size overhead overhead_ratio
> > > 526.23MB 199.18MB 209.81MB 10.64MB 5.34%
> > > 288.68MB 97.45MB 104.08MB 6.63MB 6.80%
> > > 177.68MB 61.14MB 66.93MB 5.79MB 9.47%
> > > 146.83MB 47.34MB 52.79MB 5.45MB 11.51%
> > > 124.52MB 38.87MB 44.30MB 5.43MB 13.96%
> > > 104.29MB 31.70MB 36.83MB 5.13MB 16.19%
> > > 84.70MB 22.88MB 27.92MB 5.04MB 22.04%
> > > 67.11MB 14.83MB 19.26MB 4.43MB 29.86%
> > > 60.82MB 11.10MB 14.90MB 3.79MB 34.17%
> > > 55.90MB 8.82MB 12.61MB 3.79MB 42.97%
> > > 53.32MB 8.01MB 11.73MB 3.73MB 46.53%
> > >
> > > As you can see above result, merged one has better utilization (overhead
> > > ratio, 5th column) and uses less memory (mem_used_total, 3rd column).
> > >
> > > Changes from v1:
> > > - More commit description about what to do in this patch.
> > > - Remove nr_obj in size_class, because it isn't need after initialization.
> > > - Rename __size_class to size_class, size_class to merged_size_class.
> > > - Add code comment for merged_size_class of struct zs_pool.
> > > - Add code comment how merging works in zs_create_pool().
> > >
> > > Changes from v2:
> > > - Add more commit description (Dan)
> > > - dynamically allocate size_class structure (Dan)
> > > - rename objs_per_zspage to get_maxobj_per_zspage (Minchan)
> > >
> > > Changes from v3:
> > > - Add error handling logic in zs_create_pool (Dan)
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
> > > ---
> > > mm/zsmalloc.c | 84 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> > > 1 file changed, 70 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/mm/zsmalloc.c b/mm/zsmalloc.c
> > > index c4a9157..11556ae 100644
> > > --- a/mm/zsmalloc.c
> > > +++ b/mm/zsmalloc.c
> > > @@ -187,6 +187,7 @@ enum fullness_group {
> > > static const int fullness_threshold_frac = 4;
> > >
> > > struct size_class {
> > > + int ref;
> >
> > Couldn't we remove the ref from size_class by making zs_destroy_pool
> > aware of merged size class like zs_create_pool?
> >
>
> Hello,
>
> I think that using ref would makes intuitive code. Although there is
> some memory overhead, it is really small. So I prefer to this way.
>
> But, if you think that removing ref is better, I will do it.
> Please let me know your final decision.
Yeb, please remove the ref. I want to keep size_class small for
cache footprint.
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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