linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] mm: support large folios swap-in for sync io devices

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: <qim6ug5d3ibrn6mgrk7oybml7qatgw654y2t6wlc25pnpddr2i@yniwf64alx23>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2024 10:31:01 -0700
From: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>
To: hanchuanhua@...o.com
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, 
	baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, chrisl@...nel.org, david@...hat.com, hannes@...xchg.org, 
	hughd@...gle.com, kaleshsingh@...gle.com, kasong@...cent.com, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mhocko@...e.com, minchan@...nel.org, nphamcs@...il.com, 
	ryan.roberts@....com, senozhatsky@...omium.org, shy828301@...il.com, surenb@...gle.com, 
	v-songbaohua@...o.com, willy@...radead.org, xiang@...nel.org, ying.huang@...el.com, 
	yosryahmed@...gle.com, hch@...radead.org, ryncsn@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] mm: support large folios swap-in for sync io
 devices

On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 03:45:40PM GMT, hanchuanhua@...o.com wrote:
> From: Chuanhua Han <hanchuanhua@...o.com>
> 
> 
> 3. With both mTHP swap-out and swap-in supported, we offer the option to enable
>    zsmalloc compression/decompression with larger granularity[2]. The upcoming
>    optimization in zsmalloc will significantly increase swap speed and improve
>    compression efficiency. Tested by running 100 iterations of swapping 100MiB
>    of anon memory, the swap speed improved dramatically:
>                 time consumption of swapin(ms)   time consumption of swapout(ms)
>      lz4 4k                  45274                    90540
>      lz4 64k                 22942                    55667
>      zstdn 4k                85035                    186585
>      zstdn 64k               46558                    118533

Are the above number with the patch series at [2] or without? Also can
you explain your experiment setup or how can someone reproduce these?

> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240327214816.31191-1-21cnbao@gmail.com/