linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv7 10/24] zram: add zlib compression backend support

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: <jejqy2tqaasir7vtu633ns3nybrzxvjlpebfavxnmq7inq2shz@egfzio3p2wgt>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 11:56:38 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
To: Zaslonko Mikhail <zaslonko@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>, 
	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@...ux.ibm.com>, 
	Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, 
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 10/24] zram: add zlib compression backend support

On (25/05/13 14:58), Zaslonko Mikhail wrote:
> On 13.05.2025 07:41, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > Sorry for the delay,
> > 
> > On (25/05/09 17:18), Zaslonko Mikhail wrote:
> >>> When zram transitioned from Crypto API (scomp) to custom compression
> >>> API I picked the CryptoAPI deflate DEFLATE_DEF_WINBITS value:
> >>>
> >>> crypto/deflate.c: DEFLATE_DEF_WINBITS	11
> >>>
> >>> which is then passed to zlib_deflateInit2() and zlib_inflateInit2().
> >>>
> >>>> I tried to build the kernel with DEFLATE_DEF_WINBITS set to 15 and
> >>>> verified that s390 hardware deflate acceleration works for zram devices
> >>>> with a deflate compression.
> >>>
> >>> If we define it as 15 on non-s390 machines, will there be any
> >>> consequences?  Increased memory usage?  By how much?
> >>
> >> On s390, setting windowBits to 15 would lead to zlib workarea size
> >> increased by 120K (0x24dc8 -> 0x42dc8) per compression stream,
> >> i.e. per online CPU. 
> >> On non-s390 machine, that impact will be about 115K per stream. 
> >> Increasing window size should improve deflate compression,
> >> although the compression speed might be affected. Couldn't find any
> >> relevant zlib benchmarks though.
> >>
> >> Not sure what other consequences might there be for zram. Do you see any?
> > 
> > The increased per-CPU memory usage is the only thing I can think of.
> > I guess for zram we could turn this into a run-time parameter, but for
> > Crypto API compile-time is the only option, I guess.
> 
> With 'run-time parameter' you mean adding 'windowBits' as another deflate compression
> algorithm parameter for zram? Guess we could do this, using default value of 15 then.

I sent a simple patch set [1] that adds deflate.winbits parameter
support, so that it can be configured at runtime.  E.g.:

	echo "priority=1 deflate.winbits=15" > /sys/block/zram0/algorithm_params

Please take a look.

> > Can you send a patch series (for zram and Crypto API) that sets
> > windowBits to 15?
> 
> I can do it for zram. Not sure if Crypto should be changed as well. Or is it
> supposed to have the same compression defaults as zram?

Crypto API uses a hard-coded value of -11, which wouldn't work in your
case.  However, if you don't use crypto API (e.g. zswap) in your setup
then it probably doesn't need to be patched.  Cc-ed Herbert from the
crypto API side, just in case.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/20250514024825.1745489-1-senozhatsky@chromium.org