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: <20250128101442.GB691108@cmpxchg.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 05:14:42 -0500
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To: Yosry Ahmed <yosry.ahmed@...ux.dev>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Vitaly Wool <vitaly.wool@...sulko.com>,
	Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>, Nhat Pham <nphamcs@...il.com>,
	Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@...ux.dev>,
	Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>,
	WANG Xuerui <kernel@...0n.name>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: zbud: deprecate CONFIG_ZBUD

On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 11:58:21PM +0000, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> The zbud compressed pages allocator is rarely used, most users use
> zsmalloc. zbud consumes much more memory (only stores 1 or 2 compressed
> pages per physical page). The only advantage of zbud is a marginal
> performance improvement that by no means justify the memory overhead.
> 
> Historically, zsmalloc had significantly worse latency than zbud and
> z3fold but offered better memory savings.  This is no longer the case as
> shown by a simple recent analysis [1].  In a kernel build test on tmpfs
> in a limited cgroup, zbud 2-3% less time than zsmalloc, but at the cost
> of using ~32% more memory (1.5G vs 1.13G). The tradeoff does not make
> sense for zbud in any practical scenario.
> 
> The only alleged advantage of zbud is not having the dependency on
> CONFIG_MMU, but CONFIG_SWAP already depends on CONFIG_MMU anyway, and
> zbud is only used by zswap.
> 
> Following in the footsteps of [2], which deprecated z3fold, deprecated
> zbud as planned and remove it in a few cycles if no objections are
> raised from active users.
> 
> Rename the user-visible config options so that users with CONFIG_ZBUD=y
> get a new prompt with explanation during make oldconfig. Also, remove
> CONFIG_ZBUD from defconfig.
> 
> [1]https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAJD7tkbRF6od-2x_L8-A1QL3=2Ww13sCj4S3i4bNndqF+3+_Vg@mail.gmail.com/
> [2]https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240904233343.933462-1-yosryahmed@google.com/
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosry.ahmed@...ux.dev>

Can we just drop it right away?

The two cycles for z3fold were basically in the "not worth bothering"
category, since very few downstream production systems rebase that
frequently.

zsmalloc has been in use on everything from mobile devices to large
servers for years. It's been the default since 6.6 (Oct '23) for
zswap, and the only option for zram from the start.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ