linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCHv5 0/6] zram: introduce writeback bio batching

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <qn4kjdsbi4h4sw64epms3sne2xua4ucpx5p6wkwbuxt4ihhwfx@db6fy33jmwqt>
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2025 20:14:22 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
To: Yuwen Chen <ywen.chen@...mail.com>
Cc: senozhatsky@...omium.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, 
	bgeffon@...gle.com, licayy@...look.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, minchan@...nel.org, richardycc@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCHv5 0/6] zram: introduce writeback bio batching


Fixed Subject line.


On (25/11/24 10:15), Yuwen Chen wrote:
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCHv5 0/6] zram: introduce writeback bio batching
> 
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 18:12:29 +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > I had a version of the patch that had different main loop. It would
> > always first complete finished requests.  I think this one will give
> > accurate ->inflight number.
> 
> Using the following patch, the final measured result is 32. Using 32
> here might be a relatively reasonable value.
> 
>  /* XXX: should be a per-device sysfs attr */
> -#define ZRAM_WB_REQ_CNT 32
> +#define ZRAM_WB_REQ_CNT 64

Sorry, do you suggest to change default value to 64 or are you
happy with 32?