linux-kernel - [PATCH v5] z3fold: add shrinker

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

Message-Id: <20161015135632.541010b55bec496e2cae056e@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 15 Oct 2016 13:56:32 +0200
From:   Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@...il.com>
To:     Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Dan Streetman <ddstreet@...e.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Subject: [PATCH v5] z3fold: add shrinker


This patch set implements shrinker for z3fold, preceded by some
code optimizations and preparations that I thought would be
reasonable to have as separate patches.

This patch set has been verified on x86 and on Qemu emulating
Versatile Express. fio results for the resulting code are:
Run status group 0 (all jobs):
  WRITE: io=3200.0MB, aggrb=13095KB/s, minb=3273KB/s, maxb=3284KB/s, mint=249447msec, maxt=250214msec

Run status group 1 (all jobs):
   READ: io=3200.0MB, aggrb=28992KB/s, minb=7248KB/s, maxb=7273KB/s, mint=112623msec, maxt=113021msec

Run status group 2 (all jobs):
   READ: io=1595.2MB, aggrb=8825KB/s, minb=2194KB/s, maxb=2224KB/s, mint=184517msec, maxt=185077msec
  WRITE: io=1604.9MB, aggrb=8879KB/s, minb=2207KB/s, maxb=2245KB/s, mint=184519msec, maxt=185079msec

Run status group 3 (all jobs):
   READ: io=1600.6MB, aggrb=8413KB/s, minb=2084KB/s, maxb=2132KB/s, mint=193286msec, maxt=194803msec
  WRITE: io=1599.5MB, aggrb=8406KB/s, minb=2099KB/s, maxb=2120KB/s, mint=193290msec, maxt=194825msec

Disk stats (read/write):
  zram0: ios=1636792/1638952, merge=0/0, ticks=169250/462410, in_queue=633700, util=85.33%

Just for comparison, zsmalloc gives slightly worse results:
Run status group 0 (all jobs):
  WRITE: io=3200.0MB, aggrb=12827KB/s, minb=3206KB/s, maxb=3230KB/s, mint=253603msec, maxt=255450msec

Run status group 1 (all jobs):
   READ: io=3200.0MB, aggrb=26184KB/s, minb=6546KB/s, maxb=6556KB/s, mint=124940msec, maxt=125144msec

Run status group 2 (all jobs):
   READ: io=1595.2MB, aggrb=8549KB/s, minb=2123KB/s, maxb=2162KB/s, mint=190151msec, maxt=191049msec
  WRITE: io=1604.9MB, aggrb=8601KB/s, minb=2145KB/s, maxb=2172KB/s, mint=190153msec, maxt=191051msec

Run status group 3 (all jobs):
   READ: io=1600.6MB, aggrb=8147KB/s, minb=2026KB/s, maxb=2049KB/s, mint=200339msec, maxt=201154msec
  WRITE: io=1599.5MB, aggrb=8142KB/s, minb=2023KB/s, maxb=2062KB/s, mint=200343msec, maxt=201158msec

Disk stats (read/write):
  zram0: ios=1637032/1639304, merge=0/0, ticks=175840/458740, in_queue=637140, util=82.48%

Signed-off-by: Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@...il.com>