zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Copyright (C) 2014 Sergey Senozhatsky.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
|
|
|
|
* modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
|
|
|
|
* as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version
|
|
|
|
* 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include <linux/kernel.h>
|
|
|
|
#include <linux/string.h>
|
2014-04-08 02:38:20 +04:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/err.h>
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/slab.h>
|
|
|
|
#include <linux/wait.h>
|
|
|
|
#include <linux/sched.h>
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/cpu.h>
|
zram: switch to crypto compress API
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
(which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same
time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the
need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the
fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream
structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression
ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need
it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression
backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been
executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have
resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the
following case:
CPU0
zram_write()
spin_lock()
take the last idle stream
spin_unlock()
<< preempted >>
zram_read()
spin_lock()
no idle streams
spin_unlock()
schedule()
resuming zram_write compression()
but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to
evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be
-- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we
are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for
decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and
each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost
completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have
a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the
slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of
failed fast path is too low).
TEST
====
- 4 CPUs, x86_64 system
- 3G zram, lzo
- fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
test script [3] command:
ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh
BASE PATCHED
jobs1
READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s
WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s
WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s
READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s
WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s
READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s
WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s
jobs2
READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s
READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s
WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s
WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s
READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s
WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s
READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s
WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s
READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s
WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s
WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s
READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s
WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s
READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s
WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s
READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s
WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s
WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s
READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s
WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s
READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s
WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s
READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s
WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s
WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s
READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s
WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s
READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s
WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s
READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s
WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s
WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s
READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s
READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s
WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s
READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s
WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s
WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s
READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s
WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s
READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s
WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s
READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s
WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s
WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s
READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s
WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s
READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s
WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s
READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s
WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s
WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s
READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s
WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s
READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s
WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s
READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s
WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s
WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s
READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s
WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s
READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s
WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s
BASE PATCHED
jobs1 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%)
stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%)
instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16)
branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766)
branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%)
jobs2 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%)
stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%)
instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24)
branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133)
branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%)
jobs3 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%)
stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%)
instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28)
branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542)
branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%)
jobs4 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%)
stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%)
instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28)
branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068)
branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%)
jobs5 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%)
stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%)
instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29)
branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319)
branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%)
jobs6 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%)
stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%)
instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30)
branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356)
branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%)
jobs7 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%)
stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%)
instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30)
branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839)
branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%)
jobs8 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%)
stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%)
instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29)
branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769)
branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%)
jobs9 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%)
stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%)
instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29)
branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131)
branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%)
jobs10 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%)
stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%)
instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28)
branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409)
branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%)
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546
seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949
seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495
seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518
seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865
seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176
seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344
seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318
seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498
seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801
On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results):
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662
seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291
seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564
seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405
seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606
seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767
seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508
seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709
seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735
seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618
So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar.
Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API.
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2
[3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:45 +03:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/crypto.h>
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include "zcomp.h"
|
|
|
|
|
zram: switch to crypto compress API
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
(which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same
time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the
need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the
fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream
structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression
ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need
it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression
backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been
executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have
resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the
following case:
CPU0
zram_write()
spin_lock()
take the last idle stream
spin_unlock()
<< preempted >>
zram_read()
spin_lock()
no idle streams
spin_unlock()
schedule()
resuming zram_write compression()
but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to
evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be
-- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we
are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for
decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and
each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost
completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have
a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the
slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of
failed fast path is too low).
TEST
====
- 4 CPUs, x86_64 system
- 3G zram, lzo
- fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
test script [3] command:
ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh
BASE PATCHED
jobs1
READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s
WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s
WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s
READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s
WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s
READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s
WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s
jobs2
READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s
READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s
WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s
WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s
READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s
WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s
READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s
WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s
READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s
WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s
WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s
READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s
WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s
READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s
WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s
READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s
WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s
WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s
READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s
WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s
READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s
WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s
READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s
WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s
WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s
READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s
WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s
READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s
WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s
READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s
WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s
WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s
READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s
READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s
WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s
READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s
WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s
WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s
READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s
WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s
READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s
WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s
READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s
WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s
WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s
READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s
WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s
READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s
WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s
READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s
WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s
WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s
READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s
WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s
READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s
WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s
READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s
WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s
WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s
READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s
WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s
READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s
WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s
BASE PATCHED
jobs1 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%)
stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%)
instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16)
branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766)
branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%)
jobs2 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%)
stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%)
instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24)
branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133)
branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%)
jobs3 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%)
stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%)
instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28)
branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542)
branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%)
jobs4 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%)
stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%)
instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28)
branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068)
branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%)
jobs5 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%)
stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%)
instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29)
branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319)
branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%)
jobs6 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%)
stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%)
instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30)
branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356)
branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%)
jobs7 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%)
stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%)
instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30)
branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839)
branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%)
jobs8 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%)
stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%)
instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29)
branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769)
branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%)
jobs9 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%)
stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%)
instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29)
branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131)
branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%)
jobs10 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%)
stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%)
instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28)
branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409)
branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%)
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546
seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949
seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495
seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518
seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865
seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176
seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344
seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318
seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498
seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801
On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results):
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662
seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291
seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564
seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405
seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606
seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767
seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508
seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709
seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735
seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618
So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar.
Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API.
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2
[3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:45 +03:00
|
|
|
static const char * const backends[] = {
|
|
|
|
"lzo",
|
2016-07-27 01:22:54 +03:00
|
|
|
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CRYPTO_LZ4)
|
zram: switch to crypto compress API
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
(which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same
time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the
need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the
fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream
structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression
ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need
it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression
backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been
executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have
resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the
following case:
CPU0
zram_write()
spin_lock()
take the last idle stream
spin_unlock()
<< preempted >>
zram_read()
spin_lock()
no idle streams
spin_unlock()
schedule()
resuming zram_write compression()
but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to
evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be
-- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we
are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for
decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and
each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost
completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have
a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the
slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of
failed fast path is too low).
TEST
====
- 4 CPUs, x86_64 system
- 3G zram, lzo
- fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
test script [3] command:
ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh
BASE PATCHED
jobs1
READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s
WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s
WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s
READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s
WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s
READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s
WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s
jobs2
READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s
READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s
WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s
WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s
READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s
WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s
READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s
WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s
READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s
WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s
WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s
READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s
WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s
READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s
WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s
READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s
WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s
WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s
READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s
WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s
READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s
WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s
READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s
WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s
WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s
READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s
WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s
READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s
WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s
READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s
WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s
WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s
READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s
READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s
WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s
READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s
WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s
WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s
READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s
WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s
READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s
WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s
READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s
WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s
WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s
READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s
WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s
READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s
WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s
READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s
WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s
WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s
READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s
WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s
READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s
WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s
READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s
WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s
WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s
READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s
WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s
READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s
WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s
BASE PATCHED
jobs1 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%)
stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%)
instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16)
branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766)
branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%)
jobs2 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%)
stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%)
instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24)
branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133)
branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%)
jobs3 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%)
stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%)
instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28)
branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542)
branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%)
jobs4 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%)
stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%)
instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28)
branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068)
branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%)
jobs5 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%)
stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%)
instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29)
branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319)
branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%)
jobs6 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%)
stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%)
instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30)
branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356)
branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%)
jobs7 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%)
stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%)
instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30)
branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839)
branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%)
jobs8 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%)
stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%)
instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29)
branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769)
branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%)
jobs9 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%)
stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%)
instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29)
branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131)
branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%)
jobs10 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%)
stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%)
instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28)
branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409)
branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%)
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546
seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949
seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495
seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518
seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865
seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176
seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344
seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318
seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498
seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801
On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results):
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662
seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291
seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564
seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405
seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606
seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767
seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508
seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709
seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735
seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618
So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar.
Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API.
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2
[3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:45 +03:00
|
|
|
"lz4",
|
2016-07-27 01:22:56 +03:00
|
|
|
#endif
|
|
|
|
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CRYPTO_LZ4HC)
|
|
|
|
"lz4hc",
|
|
|
|
#endif
|
|
|
|
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CRYPTO_842)
|
|
|
|
"842",
|
zram: add zstd to the supported algorithms list
Add ZSTD to the list of supported compression algorithms.
ZRAM fio perf test:
LZO DEFLATE ZSTD
#jobs1
WRITE: (2180MB/s) (77.2MB/s) (1429MB/s)
WRITE: (1617MB/s) (77.7MB/s) (1202MB/s)
READ: (426MB/s) (595MB/s) (1181MB/s)
READ: (422MB/s) (572MB/s) (1020MB/s)
READ: (318MB/s) (67.8MB/s) (563MB/s)
WRITE: (318MB/s) (67.9MB/s) (564MB/s)
READ: (336MB/s) (68.3MB/s) (583MB/s)
WRITE: (335MB/s) (68.2MB/s) (582MB/s)
#jobs2
WRITE: (3441MB/s) (152MB/s) (2141MB/s)
WRITE: (2507MB/s) (147MB/s) (1888MB/s)
READ: (801MB/s) (1146MB/s) (1890MB/s)
READ: (767MB/s) (1096MB/s) (2073MB/s)
READ: (621MB/s) (126MB/s) (1009MB/s)
WRITE: (621MB/s) (126MB/s) (1009MB/s)
READ: (656MB/s) (125MB/s) (1075MB/s)
WRITE: (657MB/s) (126MB/s) (1077MB/s)
#jobs3
WRITE: (4772MB/s) (225MB/s) (3394MB/s)
WRITE: (3905MB/s) (211MB/s) (2939MB/s)
READ: (1216MB/s) (1608MB/s) (3218MB/s)
READ: (1159MB/s) (1431MB/s) (2981MB/s)
READ: (906MB/s) (156MB/s) (1457MB/s)
WRITE: (907MB/s) (156MB/s) (1458MB/s)
READ: (953MB/s) (158MB/s) (1595MB/s)
WRITE: (952MB/s) (157MB/s) (1593MB/s)
#jobs4
WRITE: (6036MB/s) (265MB/s) (4469MB/s)
WRITE: (5059MB/s) (263MB/s) (3951MB/s)
READ: (1618MB/s) (2066MB/s) (4276MB/s)
READ: (1573MB/s) (1942MB/s) (3830MB/s)
READ: (1202MB/s) (227MB/s) (1971MB/s)
WRITE: (1200MB/s) (227MB/s) (1968MB/s)
READ: (1265MB/s) (226MB/s) (2116MB/s)
WRITE: (1264MB/s) (226MB/s) (2114MB/s)
#jobs5
WRITE: (5339MB/s) (233MB/s) (3781MB/s)
WRITE: (4298MB/s) (234MB/s) (3276MB/s)
READ: (1626MB/s) (2048MB/s) (4081MB/s)
READ: (1567MB/s) (1929MB/s) (3758MB/s)
READ: (1174MB/s) (205MB/s) (1747MB/s)
WRITE: (1173MB/s) (204MB/s) (1746MB/s)
READ: (1214MB/s) (208MB/s) (1890MB/s)
WRITE: (1215MB/s) (208MB/s) (1892MB/s)
#jobs6
WRITE: (5666MB/s) (270MB/s) (4338MB/s)
WRITE: (4828MB/s) (267MB/s) (3772MB/s)
READ: (1803MB/s) (2058MB/s) (4946MB/s)
READ: (1805MB/s) (2156MB/s) (4711MB/s)
READ: (1334MB/s) (235MB/s) (2135MB/s)
WRITE: (1335MB/s) (235MB/s) (2137MB/s)
READ: (1364MB/s) (236MB/s) (2268MB/s)
WRITE: (1365MB/s) (237MB/s) (2270MB/s)
#jobs7
WRITE: (5474MB/s) (270MB/s) (4300MB/s)
WRITE: (4666MB/s) (266MB/s) (3817MB/s)
READ: (2022MB/s) (2319MB/s) (5472MB/s)
READ: (1924MB/s) (2260MB/s) (5031MB/s)
READ: (1369MB/s) (242MB/s) (2153MB/s)
WRITE: (1370MB/s) (242MB/s) (2155MB/s)
READ: (1499MB/s) (246MB/s) (2310MB/s)
WRITE: (1497MB/s) (246MB/s) (2307MB/s)
#jobs8
WRITE: (5558MB/s) (273MB/s) (4439MB/s)
WRITE: (4763MB/s) (271MB/s) (3918MB/s)
READ: (2201MB/s) (2599MB/s) (6062MB/s)
READ: (2105MB/s) (2463MB/s) (5413MB/s)
READ: (1490MB/s) (252MB/s) (2238MB/s)
WRITE: (1488MB/s) (252MB/s) (2236MB/s)
READ: (1566MB/s) (254MB/s) (2434MB/s)
WRITE: (1568MB/s) (254MB/s) (2437MB/s)
#jobs9
WRITE: (5120MB/s) (264MB/s) (4035MB/s)
WRITE: (4531MB/s) (267MB/s) (3740MB/s)
READ: (1940MB/s) (2258MB/s) (4986MB/s)
READ: (2024MB/s) (2387MB/s) (4871MB/s)
READ: (1343MB/s) (246MB/s) (2038MB/s)
WRITE: (1342MB/s) (246MB/s) (2037MB/s)
READ: (1553MB/s) (238MB/s) (2243MB/s)
WRITE: (1552MB/s) (238MB/s) (2242MB/s)
#jobs10
WRITE: (5345MB/s) (271MB/s) (3988MB/s)
WRITE: (4750MB/s) (254MB/s) (3668MB/s)
READ: (1876MB/s) (2363MB/s) (5150MB/s)
READ: (1990MB/s) (2256MB/s) (5080MB/s)
READ: (1355MB/s) (250MB/s) (2019MB/s)
WRITE: (1356MB/s) (251MB/s) (2020MB/s)
READ: (1490MB/s) (252MB/s) (2202MB/s)
WRITE: (1488MB/s) (252MB/s) (2199MB/s)
jobs1 perfstat
instructions 52,065,555,710 ( 0.79) 855,731,114,587 ( 2.64) 54,280,709,944 ( 1.40)
branches 14,020,427,116 ( 725.847) 101,733,449,582 (1074.521) 11,170,591,067 ( 992.869)
branch-misses 22,626,174 ( 0.16%) 274,197,885 ( 0.27%) 25,915,805 ( 0.23%)
jobs2 perfstat
instructions 103,633,110,402 ( 0.75) 1,710,822,100,914 ( 2.59) 107,879,874,104 ( 1.28)
branches 27,931,237,282 ( 679.203) 203,298,267,479 (1037.326) 22,185,350,842 ( 884.427)
branch-misses 46,103,811 ( 0.17%) 533,747,204 ( 0.26%) 49,682,483 ( 0.22%)
jobs3 perfstat
instructions 154,857,283,657 ( 0.76) 2,565,748,974,197 ( 2.57) 161,515,435,813 ( 1.31)
branches 41,759,490,355 ( 670.529) 304,905,605,277 ( 978.765) 33,215,805,907 ( 888.003)
branch-misses 74,263,293 ( 0.18%) 759,746,240 ( 0.25%) 76,841,196 ( 0.23%)
jobs4 perfstat
instructions 206,215,849,076 ( 0.75) 3,420,169,460,897 ( 2.60) 215,003,061,664 ( 1.31)
branches 55,632,141,739 ( 666.501) 406,394,977,433 ( 927.241) 44,214,322,251 ( 883.532)
branch-misses 102,287,788 ( 0.18%) 1,098,617,314 ( 0.27%) 103,891,040 ( 0.23%)
jobs5 perfstat
instructions 258,711,315,588 ( 0.67) 4,275,657,533,244 ( 2.23) 269,332,235,685 ( 1.08)
branches 69,802,821,166 ( 588.823) 507,996,211,252 ( 797.036) 55,450,846,129 ( 735.095)
branch-misses 129,217,214 ( 0.19%) 1,243,284,991 ( 0.24%) 173,512,278 ( 0.31%)
jobs6 perfstat
instructions 312,796,166,008 ( 0.61) 5,133,896,344,660 ( 2.02) 323,658,769,588 ( 1.04)
branches 84,372,488,583 ( 520.541) 610,310,494,402 ( 697.642) 66,683,292,992 ( 693.939)
branch-misses 159,438,978 ( 0.19%) 1,396,368,563 ( 0.23%) 174,406,934 ( 0.26%)
jobs7 perfstat
instructions 363,211,372,930 ( 0.56) 5,988,205,600,879 ( 1.75) 377,824,674,156 ( 0.93)
branches 98,057,013,765 ( 463.117) 711,841,255,974 ( 598.762) 77,879,009,954 ( 600.443)
branch-misses 199,513,153 ( 0.20%) 1,507,651,077 ( 0.21%) 248,203,369 ( 0.32%)
jobs8 perfstat
instructions 413,960,354,615 ( 0.52) 6,842,918,558,378 ( 1.45) 431,938,486,581 ( 0.83)
branches 111,812,574,884 ( 414.224) 813,299,084,518 ( 491.173) 89,062,699,827 ( 517.795)
branch-misses 233,584,845 ( 0.21%) 1,531,593,921 ( 0.19%) 286,818,489 ( 0.32%)
jobs9 perfstat
instructions 465,976,220,300 ( 0.53) 7,698,467,237,372 ( 1.47) 486,352,600,321 ( 0.84)
branches 125,931,456,162 ( 424.063) 915,207,005,715 ( 498.192) 100,370,404,090 ( 517.439)
branch-misses 256,992,445 ( 0.20%) 1,782,809,816 ( 0.19%) 345,239,380 ( 0.34%)
jobs10 perfstat
instructions 517,406,372,715 ( 0.53) 8,553,527,312,900 ( 1.48) 540,732,653,094 ( 0.84)
branches 139,839,780,676 ( 427.732) 1,016,737,699,389 ( 503.172) 111,696,557,638 ( 516.750)
branch-misses 259,595,561 ( 0.19%) 1,952,570,279 ( 0.19%) 357,818,661 ( 0.32%)
seconds elapsed 20.630411534 96.084546565 12.743373571
seconds elapsed 22.292627625 100.984155001 14.407413560
seconds elapsed 22.396016966 110.344880848 14.032201392
seconds elapsed 22.517330949 113.351459170 14.243074935
seconds elapsed 28.548305104 156.515193765 19.159286861
seconds elapsed 30.453538116 164.559937678 19.362492717
seconds elapsed 33.467108086 188.486827481 21.492612173
seconds elapsed 35.617727591 209.602677783 23.256422492
seconds elapsed 42.584239509 243.959902566 28.458540338
seconds elapsed 47.683632526 269.635248851 31.542404137
Over all, ZSTD has slower WRITE, but much faster READ (perhaps
a static compression buffer used during the test helped ZSTD a
lot), which results in faster test results.
Memory consumption (zram mm_stat file):
zram LZO mm_stat
mm_stat (jobs1): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33558528 0 0
mm_stat (jobs2): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33558528 0 0
mm_stat (jobs3): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33562624 0 0
mm_stat (jobs4): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33558528 0 0
mm_stat (jobs5): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33558528 0 0
mm_stat (jobs6): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33562624 0 0
mm_stat (jobs7): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33566720 0 0
mm_stat (jobs8): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33558528 0 0
mm_stat (jobs9): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33558528 0 0
mm_stat (jobs10): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33562624 0 0
zram DEFLATE mm_stat
mm_stat (jobs1): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0
mm_stat (jobs2): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0
mm_stat (jobs3): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0
mm_stat (jobs4): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0
mm_stat (jobs5): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0
mm_stat (jobs6): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0
mm_stat (jobs7): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25190400 0 0
mm_stat (jobs8): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25190400 0 0
mm_stat (jobs9): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0
mm_stat (jobs10): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0
zram ZSTD mm_stat
mm_stat (jobs1): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0
mm_stat (jobs2): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0
mm_stat (jobs3): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16785408 0 0
mm_stat (jobs4): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0
mm_stat (jobs5): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0
mm_stat (jobs6): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0
mm_stat (jobs7): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0
mm_stat (jobs8): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0
mm_stat (jobs9): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16785408 0 0
mm_stat (jobs10): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0
==================================================================================
Official benchmarks [1]:
Compressor name Ratio Compression Decompress.
zstd 1.1.3 -1 2.877 430 MB/s 1110 MB/s
zlib 1.2.8 -1 2.743 110 MB/s 400 MB/s
brotli 0.5.2 -0 2.708 400 MB/s 430 MB/s
quicklz 1.5.0 -1 2.238 550 MB/s 710 MB/s
lzo1x 2.09 -1 2.108 650 MB/s 830 MB/s
lz4 1.7.5 2.101 720 MB/s 3600 MB/s
snappy 1.1.3 2.091 500 MB/s 1650 MB/s
lzf 3.6 -1 2.077 400 MB/s 860 MB/s
Minchan said:
: I did test with my sample data and compared zstd with deflate. zstd's
: compress ratio is lower a little bit but compression speed is much faster
: 3 times more and decompress speed is too 2 times more. With different
: data, it is different but overall, zstd would be better for speed at the
: cost of a little lower compress ratio(about 5%) so I believe it's worth to
: replace deflate.
[1] https://github.com/facebook/zstd
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170912050005.3247-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2017-11-16 04:33:49 +03:00
|
|
|
#endif
|
|
|
|
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CRYPTO_ZSTD)
|
|
|
|
"zstd",
|
2014-04-08 02:38:18 +04:00
|
|
|
#endif
|
2014-04-08 02:38:17 +04:00
|
|
|
NULL
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
zram: switch to crypto compress API
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
(which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same
time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the
need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the
fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream
structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression
ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need
it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression
backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been
executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have
resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the
following case:
CPU0
zram_write()
spin_lock()
take the last idle stream
spin_unlock()
<< preempted >>
zram_read()
spin_lock()
no idle streams
spin_unlock()
schedule()
resuming zram_write compression()
but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to
evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be
-- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we
are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for
decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and
each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost
completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have
a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the
slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of
failed fast path is too low).
TEST
====
- 4 CPUs, x86_64 system
- 3G zram, lzo
- fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
test script [3] command:
ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh
BASE PATCHED
jobs1
READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s
WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s
WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s
READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s
WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s
READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s
WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s
jobs2
READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s
READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s
WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s
WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s
READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s
WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s
READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s
WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s
READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s
WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s
WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s
READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s
WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s
READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s
WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s
READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s
WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s
WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s
READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s
WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s
READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s
WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s
READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s
WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s
WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s
READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s
WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s
READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s
WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s
READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s
WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s
WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s
READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s
READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s
WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s
READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s
WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s
WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s
READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s
WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s
READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s
WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s
READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s
WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s
WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s
READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s
WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s
READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s
WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s
READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s
WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s
WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s
READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s
WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s
READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s
WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s
READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s
WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s
WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s
READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s
WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s
READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s
WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s
BASE PATCHED
jobs1 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%)
stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%)
instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16)
branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766)
branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%)
jobs2 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%)
stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%)
instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24)
branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133)
branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%)
jobs3 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%)
stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%)
instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28)
branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542)
branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%)
jobs4 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%)
stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%)
instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28)
branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068)
branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%)
jobs5 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%)
stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%)
instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29)
branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319)
branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%)
jobs6 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%)
stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%)
instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30)
branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356)
branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%)
jobs7 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%)
stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%)
instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30)
branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839)
branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%)
jobs8 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%)
stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%)
instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29)
branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769)
branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%)
jobs9 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%)
stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%)
instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29)
branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131)
branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%)
jobs10 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%)
stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%)
instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28)
branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409)
branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%)
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546
seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949
seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495
seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518
seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865
seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176
seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344
seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318
seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498
seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801
On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results):
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662
seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291
seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564
seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405
seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606
seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767
seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508
seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709
seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735
seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618
So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar.
Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API.
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2
[3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:45 +03:00
|
|
|
static void zcomp_strm_free(struct zcomp_strm *zstrm)
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
{
|
zram: switch to crypto compress API
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
(which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same
time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the
need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the
fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream
structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression
ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need
it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression
backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been
executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have
resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the
following case:
CPU0
zram_write()
spin_lock()
take the last idle stream
spin_unlock()
<< preempted >>
zram_read()
spin_lock()
no idle streams
spin_unlock()
schedule()
resuming zram_write compression()
but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to
evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be
-- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we
are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for
decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and
each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost
completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have
a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the
slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of
failed fast path is too low).
TEST
====
- 4 CPUs, x86_64 system
- 3G zram, lzo
- fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
test script [3] command:
ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh
BASE PATCHED
jobs1
READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s
WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s
WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s
READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s
WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s
READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s
WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s
jobs2
READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s
READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s
WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s
WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s
READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s
WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s
READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s
WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s
READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s
WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s
WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s
READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s
WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s
READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s
WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s
READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s
WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s
WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s
READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s
WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s
READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s
WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s
READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s
WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s
WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s
READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s
WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s
READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s
WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s
READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s
WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s
WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s
READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s
READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s
WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s
READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s
WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s
WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s
READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s
WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s
READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s
WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s
READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s
WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s
WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s
READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s
WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s
READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s
WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s
READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s
WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s
WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s
READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s
WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s
READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s
WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s
READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s
WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s
WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s
READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s
WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s
READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s
WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s
BASE PATCHED
jobs1 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%)
stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%)
instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16)
branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766)
branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%)
jobs2 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%)
stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%)
instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24)
branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133)
branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%)
jobs3 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%)
stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%)
instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28)
branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542)
branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%)
jobs4 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%)
stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%)
instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28)
branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068)
branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%)
jobs5 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%)
stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%)
instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29)
branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319)
branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%)
jobs6 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%)
stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%)
instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30)
branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356)
branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%)
jobs7 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%)
stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%)
instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30)
branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839)
branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%)
jobs8 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%)
stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%)
instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29)
branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769)
branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%)
jobs9 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%)
stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%)
instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29)
branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131)
branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%)
jobs10 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%)
stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%)
instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28)
branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409)
branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%)
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546
seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949
seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495
seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518
seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865
seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176
seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344
seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318
seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498
seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801
On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results):
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662
seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291
seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564
seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405
seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606
seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767
seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508
seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709
seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735
seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618
So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar.
Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API.
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2
[3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:45 +03:00
|
|
|
if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(zstrm->tfm))
|
|
|
|
crypto_free_comp(zstrm->tfm);
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
free_pages((unsigned long)zstrm->buffer, 1);
|
|
|
|
kfree(zstrm);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
zram: switch to crypto compress API
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
(which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same
time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the
need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the
fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream
structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression
ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need
it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression
backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been
executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have
resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the
following case:
CPU0
zram_write()
spin_lock()
take the last idle stream
spin_unlock()
<< preempted >>
zram_read()
spin_lock()
no idle streams
spin_unlock()
schedule()
resuming zram_write compression()
but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to
evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be
-- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we
are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for
decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and
each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost
completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have
a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the
slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of
failed fast path is too low).
TEST
====
- 4 CPUs, x86_64 system
- 3G zram, lzo
- fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
test script [3] command:
ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh
BASE PATCHED
jobs1
READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s
WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s
WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s
READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s
WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s
READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s
WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s
jobs2
READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s
READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s
WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s
WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s
READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s
WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s
READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s
WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s
READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s
WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s
WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s
READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s
WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s
READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s
WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s
READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s
WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s
WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s
READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s
WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s
READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s
WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s
READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s
WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s
WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s
READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s
WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s
READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s
WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s
READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s
WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s
WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s
READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s
READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s
WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s
READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s
WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s
WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s
READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s
WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s
READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s
WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s
READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s
WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s
WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s
READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s
WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s
READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s
WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s
READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s
WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s
WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s
READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s
WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s
READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s
WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s
READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s
WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s
WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s
READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s
WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s
READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s
WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s
BASE PATCHED
jobs1 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%)
stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%)
instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16)
branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766)
branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%)
jobs2 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%)
stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%)
instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24)
branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133)
branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%)
jobs3 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%)
stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%)
instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28)
branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542)
branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%)
jobs4 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%)
stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%)
instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28)
branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068)
branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%)
jobs5 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%)
stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%)
instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29)
branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319)
branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%)
jobs6 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%)
stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%)
instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30)
branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356)
branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%)
jobs7 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%)
stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%)
instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30)
branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839)
branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%)
jobs8 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%)
stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%)
instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29)
branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769)
branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%)
jobs9 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%)
stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%)
instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29)
branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131)
branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%)
jobs10 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%)
stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%)
instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28)
branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409)
branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%)
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546
seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949
seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495
seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518
seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865
seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176
seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344
seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318
seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498
seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801
On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results):
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662
seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291
seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564
seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405
seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606
seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767
seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508
seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709
seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735
seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618
So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar.
Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API.
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2
[3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:45 +03:00
|
|
|
* allocate new zcomp_strm structure with ->tfm initialized by
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
* backend, return NULL on error
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2016-07-27 01:22:59 +03:00
|
|
|
static struct zcomp_strm *zcomp_strm_alloc(struct zcomp *comp)
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
{
|
2016-07-27 01:22:59 +03:00
|
|
|
struct zcomp_strm *zstrm = kmalloc(sizeof(*zstrm), GFP_KERNEL);
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
if (!zstrm)
|
|
|
|
return NULL;
|
|
|
|
|
zram: switch to crypto compress API
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
(which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same
time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the
need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the
fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream
structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression
ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need
it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression
backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been
executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have
resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the
following case:
CPU0
zram_write()
spin_lock()
take the last idle stream
spin_unlock()
<< preempted >>
zram_read()
spin_lock()
no idle streams
spin_unlock()
schedule()
resuming zram_write compression()
but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to
evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be
-- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we
are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for
decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and
each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost
completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have
a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the
slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of
failed fast path is too low).
TEST
====
- 4 CPUs, x86_64 system
- 3G zram, lzo
- fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
test script [3] command:
ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh
BASE PATCHED
jobs1
READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s
WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s
WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s
READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s
WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s
READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s
WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s
jobs2
READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s
READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s
WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s
WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s
READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s
WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s
READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s
WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s
READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s
WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s
WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s
READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s
WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s
READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s
WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s
READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s
WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s
WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s
READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s
WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s
READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s
WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s
READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s
WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s
WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s
READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s
WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s
READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s
WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s
READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s
WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s
WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s
READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s
READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s
WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s
READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s
WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s
WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s
READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s
WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s
READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s
WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s
READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s
WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s
WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s
READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s
WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s
READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s
WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s
READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s
WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s
WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s
READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s
WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s
READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s
WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s
READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s
WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s
WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s
READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s
WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s
READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s
WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s
BASE PATCHED
jobs1 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%)
stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%)
instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16)
branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766)
branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%)
jobs2 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%)
stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%)
instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24)
branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133)
branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%)
jobs3 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%)
stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%)
instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28)
branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542)
branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%)
jobs4 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%)
stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%)
instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28)
branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068)
branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%)
jobs5 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%)
stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%)
instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29)
branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319)
branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%)
jobs6 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%)
stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%)
instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30)
branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356)
branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%)
jobs7 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%)
stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%)
instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30)
branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839)
branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%)
jobs8 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%)
stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%)
instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29)
branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769)
branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%)
jobs9 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%)
stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%)
instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29)
branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131)
branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%)
jobs10 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%)
stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%)
instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28)
branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409)
branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%)
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546
seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949
seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495
seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518
seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865
seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176
seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344
seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318
seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498
seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801
On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results):
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662
seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291
seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564
seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405
seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606
seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767
seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508
seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709
seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735
seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618
So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar.
Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API.
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2
[3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:45 +03:00
|
|
|
zstrm->tfm = crypto_alloc_comp(comp->name, 0, 0);
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* allocate 2 pages. 1 for compressed data, plus 1 extra for the
|
|
|
|
* case when compressed size is larger than the original one
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2016-07-27 01:22:59 +03:00
|
|
|
zstrm->buffer = (void *)__get_free_pages(GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO, 1);
|
zram: switch to crypto compress API
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
(which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same
time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the
need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the
fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream
structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression
ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need
it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression
backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been
executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have
resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the
following case:
CPU0
zram_write()
spin_lock()
take the last idle stream
spin_unlock()
<< preempted >>
zram_read()
spin_lock()
no idle streams
spin_unlock()
schedule()
resuming zram_write compression()
but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to
evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be
-- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we
are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for
decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and
each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost
completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have
a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the
slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of
failed fast path is too low).
TEST
====
- 4 CPUs, x86_64 system
- 3G zram, lzo
- fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
test script [3] command:
ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh
BASE PATCHED
jobs1
READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s
WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s
WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s
READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s
WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s
READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s
WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s
jobs2
READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s
READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s
WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s
WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s
READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s
WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s
READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s
WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s
READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s
WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s
WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s
READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s
WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s
READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s
WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s
READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s
WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s
WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s
READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s
WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s
READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s
WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s
READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s
WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s
WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s
READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s
WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s
READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s
WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s
READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s
WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s
WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s
READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s
READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s
WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s
READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s
WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s
WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s
READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s
WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s
READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s
WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s
READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s
WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s
WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s
READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s
WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s
READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s
WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s
READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s
WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s
WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s
READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s
WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s
READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s
WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s
READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s
WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s
WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s
READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s
WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s
READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s
WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s
BASE PATCHED
jobs1 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%)
stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%)
instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16)
branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766)
branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%)
jobs2 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%)
stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%)
instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24)
branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133)
branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%)
jobs3 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%)
stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%)
instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28)
branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542)
branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%)
jobs4 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%)
stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%)
instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28)
branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068)
branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%)
jobs5 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%)
stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%)
instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29)
branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319)
branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%)
jobs6 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%)
stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%)
instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30)
branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356)
branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%)
jobs7 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%)
stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%)
instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30)
branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839)
branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%)
jobs8 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%)
stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%)
instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29)
branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769)
branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%)
jobs9 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%)
stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%)
instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29)
branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131)
branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%)
jobs10 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%)
stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%)
instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28)
branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409)
branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%)
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546
seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949
seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495
seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518
seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865
seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176
seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344
seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318
seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498
seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801
On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results):
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662
seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291
seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564
seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405
seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606
seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767
seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508
seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709
seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735
seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618
So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar.
Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API.
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2
[3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:45 +03:00
|
|
|
if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(zstrm->tfm) || !zstrm->buffer) {
|
|
|
|
zcomp_strm_free(zstrm);
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
zstrm = NULL;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return zstrm;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
zram: use crypto api to check alg availability
There is no way to get a string with all the crypto comp algorithms
supported by the crypto comp engine, so we need to maintain our own
backends list. At the same time we additionally need to use
crypto_has_comp() to make sure that the user has requested a compression
algorithm that is recognized by the crypto comp engine. Relying on
/proc/crypto is not an options here, because it does not show
not-yet-inserted compression modules.
Example:
modprobe zram
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
modprobe lz4
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
name : lz4
driver : lz4-generic
module : lz4
So the user can't tell exactly if the lz4 is really supported from
/proc/crypto output, unless someone or something has loaded it.
This patch also adds crypto_has_comp() to zcomp_available_show(). We
store all the compression algorithms names in zcomp's `backends' array,
regardless the CONFIG_CRYPTO_FOO configuration, but show only those that
are also supported by crypto engine. This helps user to know the exact
list of compression algorithms that can be used.
Example:
module lz4 is not loaded yet, but is supported by the crypto
engine. /proc/crypto has no information on this module, while
zram's `comp_algorithm' lists it:
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
cat /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm
[lzo] lz4 deflate lz4hc 842
We still use the `backends' array to determine if the requested
compression backend is known to crypto api. This array, however, may not
contain some entries, therefore as the last step we call crypto_has_comp()
function which attempts to insmod the requested compression algorithm to
determine if crypto api supports it. The advantage of this method is that
now we permit the usage of out-of-tree crypto compression modules
(implementing S/W or H/W compression).
[sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com: zram-use-crypto-api-to-check-alg-availability-v3]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160604024902.11778-4-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-5-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:48 +03:00
|
|
|
bool zcomp_available_algorithm(const char *comp)
|
|
|
|
{
|
2017-07-11 01:48:34 +03:00
|
|
|
int i;
|
zram: use crypto api to check alg availability
There is no way to get a string with all the crypto comp algorithms
supported by the crypto comp engine, so we need to maintain our own
backends list. At the same time we additionally need to use
crypto_has_comp() to make sure that the user has requested a compression
algorithm that is recognized by the crypto comp engine. Relying on
/proc/crypto is not an options here, because it does not show
not-yet-inserted compression modules.
Example:
modprobe zram
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
modprobe lz4
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
name : lz4
driver : lz4-generic
module : lz4
So the user can't tell exactly if the lz4 is really supported from
/proc/crypto output, unless someone or something has loaded it.
This patch also adds crypto_has_comp() to zcomp_available_show(). We
store all the compression algorithms names in zcomp's `backends' array,
regardless the CONFIG_CRYPTO_FOO configuration, but show only those that
are also supported by crypto engine. This helps user to know the exact
list of compression algorithms that can be used.
Example:
module lz4 is not loaded yet, but is supported by the crypto
engine. /proc/crypto has no information on this module, while
zram's `comp_algorithm' lists it:
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
cat /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm
[lzo] lz4 deflate lz4hc 842
We still use the `backends' array to determine if the requested
compression backend is known to crypto api. This array, however, may not
contain some entries, therefore as the last step we call crypto_has_comp()
function which attempts to insmod the requested compression algorithm to
determine if crypto api supports it. The advantage of this method is that
now we permit the usage of out-of-tree crypto compression modules
(implementing S/W or H/W compression).
[sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com: zram-use-crypto-api-to-check-alg-availability-v3]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160604024902.11778-4-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-5-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:48 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2017-07-11 01:48:34 +03:00
|
|
|
i = __sysfs_match_string(backends, -1, comp);
|
|
|
|
if (i >= 0)
|
|
|
|
return true;
|
zram: use crypto api to check alg availability
There is no way to get a string with all the crypto comp algorithms
supported by the crypto comp engine, so we need to maintain our own
backends list. At the same time we additionally need to use
crypto_has_comp() to make sure that the user has requested a compression
algorithm that is recognized by the crypto comp engine. Relying on
/proc/crypto is not an options here, because it does not show
not-yet-inserted compression modules.
Example:
modprobe zram
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
modprobe lz4
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
name : lz4
driver : lz4-generic
module : lz4
So the user can't tell exactly if the lz4 is really supported from
/proc/crypto output, unless someone or something has loaded it.
This patch also adds crypto_has_comp() to zcomp_available_show(). We
store all the compression algorithms names in zcomp's `backends' array,
regardless the CONFIG_CRYPTO_FOO configuration, but show only those that
are also supported by crypto engine. This helps user to know the exact
list of compression algorithms that can be used.
Example:
module lz4 is not loaded yet, but is supported by the crypto
engine. /proc/crypto has no information on this module, while
zram's `comp_algorithm' lists it:
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
cat /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm
[lzo] lz4 deflate lz4hc 842
We still use the `backends' array to determine if the requested
compression backend is known to crypto api. This array, however, may not
contain some entries, therefore as the last step we call crypto_has_comp()
function which attempts to insmod the requested compression algorithm to
determine if crypto api supports it. The advantage of this method is that
now we permit the usage of out-of-tree crypto compression modules
(implementing S/W or H/W compression).
[sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com: zram-use-crypto-api-to-check-alg-availability-v3]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160604024902.11778-4-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-5-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:48 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Crypto does not ignore a trailing new line symbol,
|
|
|
|
* so make sure you don't supply a string containing
|
|
|
|
* one.
|
|
|
|
* This also means that we permit zcomp initialisation
|
|
|
|
* with any compressing algorithm known to crypto api.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
return crypto_has_comp(comp, 0, 0) == 1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-04-08 02:38:17 +04:00
|
|
|
/* show available compressors */
|
|
|
|
ssize_t zcomp_available_show(const char *comp, char *buf)
|
|
|
|
{
|
zram: use crypto api to check alg availability
There is no way to get a string with all the crypto comp algorithms
supported by the crypto comp engine, so we need to maintain our own
backends list. At the same time we additionally need to use
crypto_has_comp() to make sure that the user has requested a compression
algorithm that is recognized by the crypto comp engine. Relying on
/proc/crypto is not an options here, because it does not show
not-yet-inserted compression modules.
Example:
modprobe zram
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
modprobe lz4
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
name : lz4
driver : lz4-generic
module : lz4
So the user can't tell exactly if the lz4 is really supported from
/proc/crypto output, unless someone or something has loaded it.
This patch also adds crypto_has_comp() to zcomp_available_show(). We
store all the compression algorithms names in zcomp's `backends' array,
regardless the CONFIG_CRYPTO_FOO configuration, but show only those that
are also supported by crypto engine. This helps user to know the exact
list of compression algorithms that can be used.
Example:
module lz4 is not loaded yet, but is supported by the crypto
engine. /proc/crypto has no information on this module, while
zram's `comp_algorithm' lists it:
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
cat /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm
[lzo] lz4 deflate lz4hc 842
We still use the `backends' array to determine if the requested
compression backend is known to crypto api. This array, however, may not
contain some entries, therefore as the last step we call crypto_has_comp()
function which attempts to insmod the requested compression algorithm to
determine if crypto api supports it. The advantage of this method is that
now we permit the usage of out-of-tree crypto compression modules
(implementing S/W or H/W compression).
[sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com: zram-use-crypto-api-to-check-alg-availability-v3]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160604024902.11778-4-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-5-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:48 +03:00
|
|
|
bool known_algorithm = false;
|
2014-04-08 02:38:17 +04:00
|
|
|
ssize_t sz = 0;
|
|
|
|
int i = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
zram: use crypto api to check alg availability
There is no way to get a string with all the crypto comp algorithms
supported by the crypto comp engine, so we need to maintain our own
backends list. At the same time we additionally need to use
crypto_has_comp() to make sure that the user has requested a compression
algorithm that is recognized by the crypto comp engine. Relying on
/proc/crypto is not an options here, because it does not show
not-yet-inserted compression modules.
Example:
modprobe zram
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
modprobe lz4
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
name : lz4
driver : lz4-generic
module : lz4
So the user can't tell exactly if the lz4 is really supported from
/proc/crypto output, unless someone or something has loaded it.
This patch also adds crypto_has_comp() to zcomp_available_show(). We
store all the compression algorithms names in zcomp's `backends' array,
regardless the CONFIG_CRYPTO_FOO configuration, but show only those that
are also supported by crypto engine. This helps user to know the exact
list of compression algorithms that can be used.
Example:
module lz4 is not loaded yet, but is supported by the crypto
engine. /proc/crypto has no information on this module, while
zram's `comp_algorithm' lists it:
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
cat /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm
[lzo] lz4 deflate lz4hc 842
We still use the `backends' array to determine if the requested
compression backend is known to crypto api. This array, however, may not
contain some entries, therefore as the last step we call crypto_has_comp()
function which attempts to insmod the requested compression algorithm to
determine if crypto api supports it. The advantage of this method is that
now we permit the usage of out-of-tree crypto compression modules
(implementing S/W or H/W compression).
[sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com: zram-use-crypto-api-to-check-alg-availability-v3]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160604024902.11778-4-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-5-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:48 +03:00
|
|
|
for (; backends[i]; i++) {
|
|
|
|
if (!strcmp(comp, backends[i])) {
|
|
|
|
known_algorithm = true;
|
2014-04-08 02:38:22 +04:00
|
|
|
sz += scnprintf(buf + sz, PAGE_SIZE - sz - 2,
|
zram: switch to crypto compress API
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
(which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same
time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the
need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the
fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream
structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression
ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need
it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression
backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been
executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have
resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the
following case:
CPU0
zram_write()
spin_lock()
take the last idle stream
spin_unlock()
<< preempted >>
zram_read()
spin_lock()
no idle streams
spin_unlock()
schedule()
resuming zram_write compression()
but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to
evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be
-- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we
are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for
decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and
each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost
completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have
a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the
slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of
failed fast path is too low).
TEST
====
- 4 CPUs, x86_64 system
- 3G zram, lzo
- fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
test script [3] command:
ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh
BASE PATCHED
jobs1
READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s
WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s
WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s
READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s
WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s
READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s
WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s
jobs2
READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s
READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s
WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s
WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s
READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s
WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s
READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s
WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s
READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s
WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s
WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s
READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s
WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s
READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s
WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s
READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s
WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s
WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s
READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s
WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s
READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s
WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s
READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s
WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s
WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s
READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s
WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s
READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s
WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s
READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s
WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s
WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s
READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s
READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s
WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s
READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s
WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s
WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s
READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s
WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s
READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s
WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s
READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s
WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s
WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s
READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s
WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s
READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s
WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s
READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s
WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s
WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s
READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s
WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s
READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s
WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s
READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s
WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s
WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s
READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s
WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s
READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s
WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s
BASE PATCHED
jobs1 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%)
stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%)
instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16)
branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766)
branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%)
jobs2 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%)
stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%)
instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24)
branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133)
branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%)
jobs3 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%)
stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%)
instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28)
branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542)
branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%)
jobs4 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%)
stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%)
instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28)
branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068)
branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%)
jobs5 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%)
stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%)
instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29)
branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319)
branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%)
jobs6 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%)
stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%)
instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30)
branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356)
branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%)
jobs7 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%)
stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%)
instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30)
branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839)
branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%)
jobs8 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%)
stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%)
instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29)
branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769)
branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%)
jobs9 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%)
stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%)
instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29)
branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131)
branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%)
jobs10 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%)
stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%)
instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28)
branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409)
branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%)
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546
seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949
seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495
seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518
seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865
seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176
seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344
seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318
seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498
seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801
On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results):
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662
seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291
seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564
seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405
seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606
seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767
seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508
seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709
seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735
seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618
So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar.
Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API.
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2
[3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:45 +03:00
|
|
|
"[%s] ", backends[i]);
|
zram: use crypto api to check alg availability
There is no way to get a string with all the crypto comp algorithms
supported by the crypto comp engine, so we need to maintain our own
backends list. At the same time we additionally need to use
crypto_has_comp() to make sure that the user has requested a compression
algorithm that is recognized by the crypto comp engine. Relying on
/proc/crypto is not an options here, because it does not show
not-yet-inserted compression modules.
Example:
modprobe zram
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
modprobe lz4
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
name : lz4
driver : lz4-generic
module : lz4
So the user can't tell exactly if the lz4 is really supported from
/proc/crypto output, unless someone or something has loaded it.
This patch also adds crypto_has_comp() to zcomp_available_show(). We
store all the compression algorithms names in zcomp's `backends' array,
regardless the CONFIG_CRYPTO_FOO configuration, but show only those that
are also supported by crypto engine. This helps user to know the exact
list of compression algorithms that can be used.
Example:
module lz4 is not loaded yet, but is supported by the crypto
engine. /proc/crypto has no information on this module, while
zram's `comp_algorithm' lists it:
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
cat /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm
[lzo] lz4 deflate lz4hc 842
We still use the `backends' array to determine if the requested
compression backend is known to crypto api. This array, however, may not
contain some entries, therefore as the last step we call crypto_has_comp()
function which attempts to insmod the requested compression algorithm to
determine if crypto api supports it. The advantage of this method is that
now we permit the usage of out-of-tree crypto compression modules
(implementing S/W or H/W compression).
[sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com: zram-use-crypto-api-to-check-alg-availability-v3]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160604024902.11778-4-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-5-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:48 +03:00
|
|
|
} else {
|
2014-04-08 02:38:22 +04:00
|
|
|
sz += scnprintf(buf + sz, PAGE_SIZE - sz - 2,
|
zram: switch to crypto compress API
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
(which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same
time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the
need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the
fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream
structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression
ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need
it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression
backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been
executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have
resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the
following case:
CPU0
zram_write()
spin_lock()
take the last idle stream
spin_unlock()
<< preempted >>
zram_read()
spin_lock()
no idle streams
spin_unlock()
schedule()
resuming zram_write compression()
but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to
evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be
-- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we
are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for
decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and
each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost
completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have
a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the
slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of
failed fast path is too low).
TEST
====
- 4 CPUs, x86_64 system
- 3G zram, lzo
- fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
test script [3] command:
ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh
BASE PATCHED
jobs1
READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s
WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s
WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s
READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s
WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s
READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s
WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s
jobs2
READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s
READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s
WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s
WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s
READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s
WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s
READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s
WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s
READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s
WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s
WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s
READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s
WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s
READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s
WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s
READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s
WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s
WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s
READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s
WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s
READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s
WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s
READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s
WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s
WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s
READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s
WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s
READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s
WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s
READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s
WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s
WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s
READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s
READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s
WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s
READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s
WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s
WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s
READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s
WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s
READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s
WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s
READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s
WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s
WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s
READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s
WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s
READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s
WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s
READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s
WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s
WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s
READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s
WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s
READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s
WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s
READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s
WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s
WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s
READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s
WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s
READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s
WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s
BASE PATCHED
jobs1 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%)
stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%)
instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16)
branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766)
branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%)
jobs2 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%)
stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%)
instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24)
branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133)
branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%)
jobs3 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%)
stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%)
instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28)
branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542)
branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%)
jobs4 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%)
stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%)
instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28)
branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068)
branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%)
jobs5 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%)
stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%)
instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29)
branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319)
branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%)
jobs6 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%)
stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%)
instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30)
branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356)
branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%)
jobs7 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%)
stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%)
instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30)
branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839)
branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%)
jobs8 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%)
stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%)
instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29)
branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769)
branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%)
jobs9 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%)
stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%)
instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29)
branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131)
branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%)
jobs10 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%)
stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%)
instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28)
branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409)
branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%)
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546
seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949
seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495
seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518
seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865
seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176
seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344
seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318
seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498
seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801
On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results):
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662
seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291
seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564
seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405
seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606
seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767
seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508
seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709
seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735
seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618
So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar.
Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API.
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2
[3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:45 +03:00
|
|
|
"%s ", backends[i]);
|
zram: use crypto api to check alg availability
There is no way to get a string with all the crypto comp algorithms
supported by the crypto comp engine, so we need to maintain our own
backends list. At the same time we additionally need to use
crypto_has_comp() to make sure that the user has requested a compression
algorithm that is recognized by the crypto comp engine. Relying on
/proc/crypto is not an options here, because it does not show
not-yet-inserted compression modules.
Example:
modprobe zram
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
modprobe lz4
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
name : lz4
driver : lz4-generic
module : lz4
So the user can't tell exactly if the lz4 is really supported from
/proc/crypto output, unless someone or something has loaded it.
This patch also adds crypto_has_comp() to zcomp_available_show(). We
store all the compression algorithms names in zcomp's `backends' array,
regardless the CONFIG_CRYPTO_FOO configuration, but show only those that
are also supported by crypto engine. This helps user to know the exact
list of compression algorithms that can be used.
Example:
module lz4 is not loaded yet, but is supported by the crypto
engine. /proc/crypto has no information on this module, while
zram's `comp_algorithm' lists it:
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
cat /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm
[lzo] lz4 deflate lz4hc 842
We still use the `backends' array to determine if the requested
compression backend is known to crypto api. This array, however, may not
contain some entries, therefore as the last step we call crypto_has_comp()
function which attempts to insmod the requested compression algorithm to
determine if crypto api supports it. The advantage of this method is that
now we permit the usage of out-of-tree crypto compression modules
(implementing S/W or H/W compression).
[sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com: zram-use-crypto-api-to-check-alg-availability-v3]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160604024902.11778-4-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-5-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:48 +03:00
|
|
|
}
|
2014-04-08 02:38:17 +04:00
|
|
|
}
|
zram: use crypto api to check alg availability
There is no way to get a string with all the crypto comp algorithms
supported by the crypto comp engine, so we need to maintain our own
backends list. At the same time we additionally need to use
crypto_has_comp() to make sure that the user has requested a compression
algorithm that is recognized by the crypto comp engine. Relying on
/proc/crypto is not an options here, because it does not show
not-yet-inserted compression modules.
Example:
modprobe zram
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
modprobe lz4
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
name : lz4
driver : lz4-generic
module : lz4
So the user can't tell exactly if the lz4 is really supported from
/proc/crypto output, unless someone or something has loaded it.
This patch also adds crypto_has_comp() to zcomp_available_show(). We
store all the compression algorithms names in zcomp's `backends' array,
regardless the CONFIG_CRYPTO_FOO configuration, but show only those that
are also supported by crypto engine. This helps user to know the exact
list of compression algorithms that can be used.
Example:
module lz4 is not loaded yet, but is supported by the crypto
engine. /proc/crypto has no information on this module, while
zram's `comp_algorithm' lists it:
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
cat /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm
[lzo] lz4 deflate lz4hc 842
We still use the `backends' array to determine if the requested
compression backend is known to crypto api. This array, however, may not
contain some entries, therefore as the last step we call crypto_has_comp()
function which attempts to insmod the requested compression algorithm to
determine if crypto api supports it. The advantage of this method is that
now we permit the usage of out-of-tree crypto compression modules
(implementing S/W or H/W compression).
[sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com: zram-use-crypto-api-to-check-alg-availability-v3]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160604024902.11778-4-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-5-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:48 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Out-of-tree module known to crypto api or a missing
|
|
|
|
* entry in `backends'.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
if (!known_algorithm && crypto_has_comp(comp, 0, 0) == 1)
|
|
|
|
sz += scnprintf(buf + sz, PAGE_SIZE - sz - 2,
|
|
|
|
"[%s] ", comp);
|
|
|
|
|
2014-04-08 02:38:22 +04:00
|
|
|
sz += scnprintf(buf + sz, PAGE_SIZE - sz, "\n");
|
2014-04-08 02:38:17 +04:00
|
|
|
return sz;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
zram: rename zstrm find-release functions
This has started as a 'add zlib support' work, but after some thinking I
saw no blockers for a bigger change -- a switch to crypto API.
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
and opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
This patch set also eliminates the need of a new context-less crypto API
interface, which was quite hard to sell, so we can move along faster.
benchmarks:
(x86_64, 4GB, zram-perf script)
perf reported run-time fio (max jobs=3). I performed fio test with the
increasing number of parallel jobs (max to 3) on a 3G zram device, using
`static' data and the following crypto comp algorithms:
842, deflate, lz4, lz4hc, lzo
the output was:
- test running time (which can tell us what algorithms performs faster)
and
- zram mm_stat (which tells the compressed memory size, max used memory, etc).
It's just for information. for example, LZ4HC has twice the running
time of LZO, but the compressed memory size is: 23592960 vs 34603008
bytes.
test-fio-zram-842
197.907655282 seconds time elapsed
201.623142884 seconds time elapsed
226.854291345 seconds time elapsed
test-fio-zram-DEFLATE
253.259516155 seconds time elapsed
258.148563401 seconds time elapsed
290.251909365 seconds time elapsed
test-fio-zram-LZ4
27.022598717 seconds time elapsed
29.580522717 seconds time elapsed
33.293463430 seconds time elapsed
test-fio-zram-LZ4HC
56.393954615 seconds time elapsed
74.904659747 seconds time elapsed
101.940998564 seconds time elapsed
test-fio-zram-LZO
28.155948075 seconds time elapsed
30.390036330 seconds time elapsed
34.455773159 seconds time elapsed
zram mm_stat-s (max fio jobs=3)
test-fio-zram-842
mm_stat (jobs1): 3221225472 673185792 690266112 0 690266112 0 0
mm_stat (jobs2): 3221225472 673185792 690266112 0 690266112 0 0
mm_stat (jobs3): 3221225472 673185792 690266112 0 690266112 0 0
test-fio-zram-DEFLATE
mm_stat (jobs1): 3221225472 24379392 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
mm_stat (jobs2): 3221225472 24379392 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
mm_stat (jobs3): 3221225472 24379392 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
test-fio-zram-LZ4
mm_stat (jobs1): 3221225472 23592960 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
mm_stat (jobs2): 3221225472 23592960 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
mm_stat (jobs3): 3221225472 23592960 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
test-fio-zram-LZ4HC
mm_stat (jobs1): 3221225472 23592960 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
mm_stat (jobs2): 3221225472 23592960 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
mm_stat (jobs3): 3221225472 23592960 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
test-fio-zram-LZO
mm_stat (jobs1): 3221225472 34603008 50335744 0 50335744 0 0
mm_stat (jobs2): 3221225472 34603008 50335744 0 50335744 0 0
mm_stat (jobs3): 3221225472 34603008 50335744 0 50339840 0 0
This patch (of 8):
We don't perform any zstream idle list lookup anymore, so
zcomp_strm_find()/zcomp_strm_release() names are not representative.
Rename to zcomp_stream_get()/zcomp_stream_put().
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-2-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:42 +03:00
|
|
|
struct zcomp_strm *zcomp_stream_get(struct zcomp *comp)
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
{
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
return *get_cpu_ptr(comp->stream);
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
zram: rename zstrm find-release functions
This has started as a 'add zlib support' work, but after some thinking I
saw no blockers for a bigger change -- a switch to crypto API.
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
and opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
This patch set also eliminates the need of a new context-less crypto API
interface, which was quite hard to sell, so we can move along faster.
benchmarks:
(x86_64, 4GB, zram-perf script)
perf reported run-time fio (max jobs=3). I performed fio test with the
increasing number of parallel jobs (max to 3) on a 3G zram device, using
`static' data and the following crypto comp algorithms:
842, deflate, lz4, lz4hc, lzo
the output was:
- test running time (which can tell us what algorithms performs faster)
and
- zram mm_stat (which tells the compressed memory size, max used memory, etc).
It's just for information. for example, LZ4HC has twice the running
time of LZO, but the compressed memory size is: 23592960 vs 34603008
bytes.
test-fio-zram-842
197.907655282 seconds time elapsed
201.623142884 seconds time elapsed
226.854291345 seconds time elapsed
test-fio-zram-DEFLATE
253.259516155 seconds time elapsed
258.148563401 seconds time elapsed
290.251909365 seconds time elapsed
test-fio-zram-LZ4
27.022598717 seconds time elapsed
29.580522717 seconds time elapsed
33.293463430 seconds time elapsed
test-fio-zram-LZ4HC
56.393954615 seconds time elapsed
74.904659747 seconds time elapsed
101.940998564 seconds time elapsed
test-fio-zram-LZO
28.155948075 seconds time elapsed
30.390036330 seconds time elapsed
34.455773159 seconds time elapsed
zram mm_stat-s (max fio jobs=3)
test-fio-zram-842
mm_stat (jobs1): 3221225472 673185792 690266112 0 690266112 0 0
mm_stat (jobs2): 3221225472 673185792 690266112 0 690266112 0 0
mm_stat (jobs3): 3221225472 673185792 690266112 0 690266112 0 0
test-fio-zram-DEFLATE
mm_stat (jobs1): 3221225472 24379392 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
mm_stat (jobs2): 3221225472 24379392 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
mm_stat (jobs3): 3221225472 24379392 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
test-fio-zram-LZ4
mm_stat (jobs1): 3221225472 23592960 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
mm_stat (jobs2): 3221225472 23592960 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
mm_stat (jobs3): 3221225472 23592960 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
test-fio-zram-LZ4HC
mm_stat (jobs1): 3221225472 23592960 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
mm_stat (jobs2): 3221225472 23592960 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
mm_stat (jobs3): 3221225472 23592960 37761024 0 37761024 0 0
test-fio-zram-LZO
mm_stat (jobs1): 3221225472 34603008 50335744 0 50335744 0 0
mm_stat (jobs2): 3221225472 34603008 50335744 0 50335744 0 0
mm_stat (jobs3): 3221225472 34603008 50335744 0 50339840 0 0
This patch (of 8):
We don't perform any zstream idle list lookup anymore, so
zcomp_strm_find()/zcomp_strm_release() names are not representative.
Rename to zcomp_stream_get()/zcomp_stream_put().
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-2-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:42 +03:00
|
|
|
void zcomp_stream_put(struct zcomp *comp)
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
{
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
put_cpu_ptr(comp->stream);
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
zram: switch to crypto compress API
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
(which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same
time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the
need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the
fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream
structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression
ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need
it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression
backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been
executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have
resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the
following case:
CPU0
zram_write()
spin_lock()
take the last idle stream
spin_unlock()
<< preempted >>
zram_read()
spin_lock()
no idle streams
spin_unlock()
schedule()
resuming zram_write compression()
but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to
evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be
-- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we
are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for
decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and
each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost
completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have
a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the
slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of
failed fast path is too low).
TEST
====
- 4 CPUs, x86_64 system
- 3G zram, lzo
- fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
test script [3] command:
ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh
BASE PATCHED
jobs1
READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s
WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s
WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s
READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s
WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s
READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s
WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s
jobs2
READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s
READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s
WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s
WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s
READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s
WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s
READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s
WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s
READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s
WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s
WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s
READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s
WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s
READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s
WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s
READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s
WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s
WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s
READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s
WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s
READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s
WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s
READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s
WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s
WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s
READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s
WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s
READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s
WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s
READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s
WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s
WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s
READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s
READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s
WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s
READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s
WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s
WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s
READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s
WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s
READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s
WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s
READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s
WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s
WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s
READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s
WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s
READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s
WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s
READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s
WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s
WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s
READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s
WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s
READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s
WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s
READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s
WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s
WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s
READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s
WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s
READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s
WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s
BASE PATCHED
jobs1 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%)
stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%)
instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16)
branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766)
branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%)
jobs2 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%)
stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%)
instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24)
branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133)
branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%)
jobs3 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%)
stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%)
instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28)
branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542)
branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%)
jobs4 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%)
stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%)
instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28)
branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068)
branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%)
jobs5 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%)
stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%)
instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29)
branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319)
branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%)
jobs6 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%)
stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%)
instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30)
branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356)
branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%)
jobs7 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%)
stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%)
instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30)
branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839)
branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%)
jobs8 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%)
stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%)
instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29)
branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769)
branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%)
jobs9 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%)
stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%)
instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29)
branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131)
branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%)
jobs10 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%)
stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%)
instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28)
branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409)
branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%)
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546
seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949
seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495
seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518
seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865
seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176
seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344
seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318
seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498
seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801
On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results):
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662
seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291
seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564
seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405
seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606
seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767
seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508
seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709
seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735
seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618
So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar.
Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API.
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2
[3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:45 +03:00
|
|
|
int zcomp_compress(struct zcomp_strm *zstrm,
|
|
|
|
const void *src, unsigned int *dst_len)
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
{
|
zram: switch to crypto compress API
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
(which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same
time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the
need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the
fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream
structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression
ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need
it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression
backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been
executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have
resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the
following case:
CPU0
zram_write()
spin_lock()
take the last idle stream
spin_unlock()
<< preempted >>
zram_read()
spin_lock()
no idle streams
spin_unlock()
schedule()
resuming zram_write compression()
but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to
evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be
-- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we
are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for
decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and
each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost
completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have
a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the
slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of
failed fast path is too low).
TEST
====
- 4 CPUs, x86_64 system
- 3G zram, lzo
- fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
test script [3] command:
ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh
BASE PATCHED
jobs1
READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s
WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s
WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s
READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s
WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s
READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s
WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s
jobs2
READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s
READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s
WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s
WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s
READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s
WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s
READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s
WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s
READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s
WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s
WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s
READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s
WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s
READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s
WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s
READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s
WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s
WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s
READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s
WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s
READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s
WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s
READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s
WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s
WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s
READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s
WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s
READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s
WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s
READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s
WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s
WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s
READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s
READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s
WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s
READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s
WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s
WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s
READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s
WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s
READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s
WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s
READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s
WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s
WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s
READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s
WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s
READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s
WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s
READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s
WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s
WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s
READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s
WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s
READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s
WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s
READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s
WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s
WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s
READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s
WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s
READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s
WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s
BASE PATCHED
jobs1 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%)
stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%)
instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16)
branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766)
branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%)
jobs2 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%)
stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%)
instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24)
branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133)
branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%)
jobs3 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%)
stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%)
instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28)
branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542)
branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%)
jobs4 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%)
stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%)
instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28)
branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068)
branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%)
jobs5 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%)
stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%)
instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29)
branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319)
branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%)
jobs6 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%)
stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%)
instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30)
branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356)
branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%)
jobs7 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%)
stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%)
instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30)
branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839)
branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%)
jobs8 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%)
stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%)
instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29)
branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769)
branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%)
jobs9 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%)
stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%)
instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29)
branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131)
branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%)
jobs10 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%)
stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%)
instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28)
branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409)
branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%)
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546
seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949
seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495
seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518
seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865
seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176
seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344
seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318
seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498
seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801
On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results):
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662
seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291
seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564
seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405
seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606
seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767
seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508
seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709
seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735
seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618
So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar.
Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API.
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2
[3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:45 +03:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Our dst memory (zstrm->buffer) is always `2 * PAGE_SIZE' sized
|
|
|
|
* because sometimes we can endup having a bigger compressed data
|
|
|
|
* due to various reasons: for example compression algorithms tend
|
|
|
|
* to add some padding to the compressed buffer. Speaking of padding,
|
|
|
|
* comp algorithm `842' pads the compressed length to multiple of 8
|
|
|
|
* and returns -ENOSP when the dst memory is not big enough, which
|
|
|
|
* is not something that ZRAM wants to see. We can handle the
|
|
|
|
* `compressed_size > PAGE_SIZE' case easily in ZRAM, but when we
|
|
|
|
* receive -ERRNO from the compressing backend we can't help it
|
|
|
|
* anymore. To make `842' happy we need to tell the exact size of
|
|
|
|
* the dst buffer, zram_drv will take care of the fact that
|
|
|
|
* compressed buffer is too big.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
*dst_len = PAGE_SIZE * 2;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return crypto_comp_compress(zstrm->tfm,
|
|
|
|
src, PAGE_SIZE,
|
|
|
|
zstrm->buffer, dst_len);
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
zram: switch to crypto compress API
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
(which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same
time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the
need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the
fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream
structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression
ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need
it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression
backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been
executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have
resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the
following case:
CPU0
zram_write()
spin_lock()
take the last idle stream
spin_unlock()
<< preempted >>
zram_read()
spin_lock()
no idle streams
spin_unlock()
schedule()
resuming zram_write compression()
but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to
evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be
-- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we
are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for
decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and
each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost
completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have
a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the
slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of
failed fast path is too low).
TEST
====
- 4 CPUs, x86_64 system
- 3G zram, lzo
- fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
test script [3] command:
ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh
BASE PATCHED
jobs1
READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s
WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s
WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s
READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s
WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s
READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s
WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s
jobs2
READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s
READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s
WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s
WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s
READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s
WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s
READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s
WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s
READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s
WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s
WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s
READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s
WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s
READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s
WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s
READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s
WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s
WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s
READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s
WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s
READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s
WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s
READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s
WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s
WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s
READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s
WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s
READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s
WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s
READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s
WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s
WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s
READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s
READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s
WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s
READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s
WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s
WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s
READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s
WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s
READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s
WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s
READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s
WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s
WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s
READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s
WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s
READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s
WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s
READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s
WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s
WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s
READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s
WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s
READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s
WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s
READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s
WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s
WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s
READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s
WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s
READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s
WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s
BASE PATCHED
jobs1 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%)
stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%)
instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16)
branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766)
branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%)
jobs2 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%)
stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%)
instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24)
branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133)
branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%)
jobs3 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%)
stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%)
instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28)
branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542)
branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%)
jobs4 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%)
stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%)
instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28)
branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068)
branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%)
jobs5 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%)
stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%)
instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29)
branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319)
branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%)
jobs6 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%)
stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%)
instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30)
branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356)
branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%)
jobs7 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%)
stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%)
instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30)
branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839)
branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%)
jobs8 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%)
stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%)
instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29)
branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769)
branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%)
jobs9 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%)
stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%)
instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29)
branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131)
branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%)
jobs10 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%)
stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%)
instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28)
branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409)
branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%)
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546
seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949
seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495
seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518
seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865
seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176
seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344
seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318
seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498
seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801
On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results):
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662
seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291
seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564
seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405
seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606
seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767
seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508
seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709
seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735
seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618
So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar.
Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API.
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2
[3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:45 +03:00
|
|
|
int zcomp_decompress(struct zcomp_strm *zstrm,
|
|
|
|
const void *src, unsigned int src_len, void *dst)
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
{
|
zram: switch to crypto compress API
We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works
absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This
removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places
(which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same
time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends
implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API.
Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the
need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the
fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream
structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression
ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need
it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression
backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been
executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have
resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the
following case:
CPU0
zram_write()
spin_lock()
take the last idle stream
spin_unlock()
<< preempted >>
zram_read()
spin_lock()
no idle streams
spin_unlock()
schedule()
resuming zram_write compression()
but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to
evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be
-- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we
are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for
decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and
each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost
completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have
a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the
slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of
failed fast path is too low).
TEST
====
- 4 CPUs, x86_64 system
- 3G zram, lzo
- fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
test script [3] command:
ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh
BASE PATCHED
jobs1
READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s
WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s
WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s
READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s
WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s
READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s
WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s
jobs2
READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s
READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s
WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s
WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s
READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s
WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s
READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s
WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s
READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s
WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s
WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s
READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s
WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s
READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s
WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s
READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s
WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s
WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s
READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s
WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s
READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s
WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s
READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s
WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s
WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s
READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s
WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s
READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s
WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s
READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s
WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s
WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s
READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s
READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s
WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s
READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s
WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s
WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s
READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s
WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s
READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s
WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s
READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s
WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s
WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s
READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s
WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s
READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s
WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s
READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s
WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s
WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s
READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s
WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s
READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s
WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s
READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s
WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s
WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s
READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s
WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s
READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s
WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s
BASE PATCHED
jobs1 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%)
stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%)
instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16)
branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766)
branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%)
jobs2 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%)
stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%)
instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24)
branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133)
branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%)
jobs3 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%)
stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%)
instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28)
branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542)
branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%)
jobs4 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%)
stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%)
instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28)
branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068)
branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%)
jobs5 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%)
stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%)
instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29)
branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319)
branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%)
jobs6 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%)
stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%)
instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30)
branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356)
branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%)
jobs7 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%)
stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%)
instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30)
branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839)
branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%)
jobs8 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%)
stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%)
instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29)
branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769)
branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%)
jobs9 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%)
stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%)
instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29)
branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131)
branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%)
jobs10 perfstat
stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%)
stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%)
instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28)
branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409)
branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%)
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546
seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949
seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495
seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518
seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865
seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176
seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344
seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318
seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498
seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801
On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results):
BASE PATCHED
seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662
seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291
seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564
seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405
seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606
seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767
seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508
seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709
seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735
seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618
So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar.
Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API.
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2
[3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:45 +03:00
|
|
|
unsigned int dst_len = PAGE_SIZE;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return crypto_comp_decompress(zstrm->tfm,
|
|
|
|
src, src_len,
|
|
|
|
dst, &dst_len);
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2016-11-27 02:13:46 +03:00
|
|
|
int zcomp_cpu_up_prepare(unsigned int cpu, struct hlist_node *node)
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
{
|
2016-11-27 02:13:46 +03:00
|
|
|
struct zcomp *comp = hlist_entry(node, struct zcomp, node);
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
struct zcomp_strm *zstrm;
|
|
|
|
|
2016-11-27 02:13:46 +03:00
|
|
|
if (WARN_ON(*per_cpu_ptr(comp->stream, cpu)))
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
zstrm = zcomp_strm_alloc(comp);
|
|
|
|
if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(zstrm)) {
|
|
|
|
pr_err("Can't allocate a compression stream\n");
|
|
|
|
return -ENOMEM;
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
}
|
2016-11-27 02:13:46 +03:00
|
|
|
*per_cpu_ptr(comp->stream, cpu) = zstrm;
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2016-11-27 02:13:46 +03:00
|
|
|
int zcomp_cpu_dead(unsigned int cpu, struct hlist_node *node)
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
{
|
2016-11-27 02:13:46 +03:00
|
|
|
struct zcomp *comp = hlist_entry(node, struct zcomp, node);
|
|
|
|
struct zcomp_strm *zstrm;
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
|
2016-11-27 02:13:46 +03:00
|
|
|
zstrm = *per_cpu_ptr(comp->stream, cpu);
|
|
|
|
if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(zstrm))
|
|
|
|
zcomp_strm_free(zstrm);
|
|
|
|
*per_cpu_ptr(comp->stream, cpu) = NULL;
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static int zcomp_init(struct zcomp *comp)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
int ret;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
comp->stream = alloc_percpu(struct zcomp_strm *);
|
|
|
|
if (!comp->stream)
|
|
|
|
return -ENOMEM;
|
|
|
|
|
2016-11-27 02:13:46 +03:00
|
|
|
ret = cpuhp_state_add_instance(CPUHP_ZCOMP_PREPARE, &comp->node);
|
|
|
|
if (ret < 0)
|
|
|
|
goto cleanup;
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cleanup:
|
2016-11-27 02:13:46 +03:00
|
|
|
free_percpu(comp->stream);
|
|
|
|
return ret;
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
void zcomp_destroy(struct zcomp *comp)
|
|
|
|
{
|
2016-11-27 02:13:46 +03:00
|
|
|
cpuhp_state_remove_instance(CPUHP_ZCOMP_PREPARE, &comp->node);
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
free_percpu(comp->stream);
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
kfree(comp);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* search available compressors for requested algorithm.
|
2014-04-08 02:38:20 +04:00
|
|
|
* allocate new zcomp and initialize it. return compressing
|
|
|
|
* backend pointer or ERR_PTR if things went bad. ERR_PTR(-EINVAL)
|
|
|
|
* if requested algorithm is not supported, ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM) in
|
2015-09-18 02:01:40 +03:00
|
|
|
* case of allocation error, or any other error potentially
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
* returned by zcomp_init().
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
*/
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
struct zcomp *zcomp_create(const char *compress)
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
struct zcomp *comp;
|
2015-09-18 02:01:40 +03:00
|
|
|
int error;
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
|
zram: use crypto api to check alg availability
There is no way to get a string with all the crypto comp algorithms
supported by the crypto comp engine, so we need to maintain our own
backends list. At the same time we additionally need to use
crypto_has_comp() to make sure that the user has requested a compression
algorithm that is recognized by the crypto comp engine. Relying on
/proc/crypto is not an options here, because it does not show
not-yet-inserted compression modules.
Example:
modprobe zram
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
modprobe lz4
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
name : lz4
driver : lz4-generic
module : lz4
So the user can't tell exactly if the lz4 is really supported from
/proc/crypto output, unless someone or something has loaded it.
This patch also adds crypto_has_comp() to zcomp_available_show(). We
store all the compression algorithms names in zcomp's `backends' array,
regardless the CONFIG_CRYPTO_FOO configuration, but show only those that
are also supported by crypto engine. This helps user to know the exact
list of compression algorithms that can be used.
Example:
module lz4 is not loaded yet, but is supported by the crypto
engine. /proc/crypto has no information on this module, while
zram's `comp_algorithm' lists it:
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
cat /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm
[lzo] lz4 deflate lz4hc 842
We still use the `backends' array to determine if the requested
compression backend is known to crypto api. This array, however, may not
contain some entries, therefore as the last step we call crypto_has_comp()
function which attempts to insmod the requested compression algorithm to
determine if crypto api supports it. The advantage of this method is that
now we permit the usage of out-of-tree crypto compression modules
(implementing S/W or H/W compression).
[sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com: zram-use-crypto-api-to-check-alg-availability-v3]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160604024902.11778-4-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-5-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:48 +03:00
|
|
|
if (!zcomp_available_algorithm(compress))
|
2014-04-08 02:38:20 +04:00
|
|
|
return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
comp = kzalloc(sizeof(struct zcomp), GFP_KERNEL);
|
|
|
|
if (!comp)
|
2014-04-08 02:38:20 +04:00
|
|
|
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
|
zram: use crypto api to check alg availability
There is no way to get a string with all the crypto comp algorithms
supported by the crypto comp engine, so we need to maintain our own
backends list. At the same time we additionally need to use
crypto_has_comp() to make sure that the user has requested a compression
algorithm that is recognized by the crypto comp engine. Relying on
/proc/crypto is not an options here, because it does not show
not-yet-inserted compression modules.
Example:
modprobe zram
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
modprobe lz4
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
name : lz4
driver : lz4-generic
module : lz4
So the user can't tell exactly if the lz4 is really supported from
/proc/crypto output, unless someone or something has loaded it.
This patch also adds crypto_has_comp() to zcomp_available_show(). We
store all the compression algorithms names in zcomp's `backends' array,
regardless the CONFIG_CRYPTO_FOO configuration, but show only those that
are also supported by crypto engine. This helps user to know the exact
list of compression algorithms that can be used.
Example:
module lz4 is not loaded yet, but is supported by the crypto
engine. /proc/crypto has no information on this module, while
zram's `comp_algorithm' lists it:
cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4
cat /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm
[lzo] lz4 deflate lz4hc 842
We still use the `backends' array to determine if the requested
compression backend is known to crypto api. This array, however, may not
contain some entries, therefore as the last step we call crypto_has_comp()
function which attempts to insmod the requested compression algorithm to
determine if crypto api supports it. The advantage of this method is that
now we permit the usage of out-of-tree crypto compression modules
(implementing S/W or H/W compression).
[sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com: zram-use-crypto-api-to-check-alg-availability-v3]
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160604024902.11778-4-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-5-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-07-27 01:22:48 +03:00
|
|
|
comp->name = compress;
|
zram: user per-cpu compression streams
Remove idle streams list and keep compression streams in per-cpu data.
This removes two contented spin_lock()/spin_unlock() calls from write
path and also prevent write OP from being preempted while holding the
compression stream, which can cause slow downs.
For instance, let's assume that we have N cpus and N-2
max_comp_streams.TASK1 owns the last idle stream, TASK2-TASK3 come in
with the write requests:
TASK1 TASK2 TASK3
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
compress
<<preempted>> zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
zram_bvec_write()
spin_lock
find_stream
spin_unlock
no_stream
schedule
spin_lock
release stream
spin_unlock
wake up TASK2
not only TASK2 and TASK3 will not get the stream, TASK1 will be
preempted in the middle of its operation; while we would prefer it to
finish compression and release the stream.
Test environment: x86_64, 4 CPU box, 3G zram, lzo
The following fio tests were executed:
read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw
with the increasing number of jobs from 1 to 10.
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
===========================================================
jobs1
READ: 2520.1MB/s 2566.5MB/s 2491.5MB/s
READ: 2102.7MB/s 2104.2MB/s 2091.3MB/s
WRITE: 1355.1MB/s 1320.2MB/s 1378.9MB/s
WRITE: 1103.5MB/s 1097.2MB/s 1122.5MB/s
READ: 434013KB/s 435153KB/s 439961KB/s
WRITE: 433969KB/s 435109KB/s 439917KB/s
READ: 403166KB/s 405139KB/s 403373KB/s
WRITE: 403223KB/s 405197KB/s 403430KB/s
jobs2
READ: 7958.6MB/s 8105.6MB/s 8073.7MB/s
READ: 6864.9MB/s 6989.8MB/s 7021.8MB/s
WRITE: 2438.1MB/s 2346.9MB/s 3400.2MB/s
WRITE: 1994.2MB/s 1990.3MB/s 2941.2MB/s
READ: 981504KB/s 973906KB/s 1018.8MB/s
WRITE: 981659KB/s 974060KB/s 1018.1MB/s
READ: 937021KB/s 938976KB/s 987250KB/s
WRITE: 934878KB/s 936830KB/s 984993KB/s
jobs3
READ: 13280MB/s 13553MB/s 13553MB/s
READ: 11534MB/s 11785MB/s 11755MB/s
WRITE: 3456.9MB/s 3469.9MB/s 4810.3MB/s
WRITE: 3029.6MB/s 3031.6MB/s 4264.8MB/s
READ: 1363.8MB/s 1362.6MB/s 1448.9MB/s
WRITE: 1361.9MB/s 1360.7MB/s 1446.9MB/s
READ: 1309.4MB/s 1310.6MB/s 1397.5MB/s
WRITE: 1307.4MB/s 1308.5MB/s 1395.3MB/s
jobs4
READ: 20244MB/s 20177MB/s 20344MB/s
READ: 17886MB/s 17913MB/s 17835MB/s
WRITE: 4071.6MB/s 4046.1MB/s 6370.2MB/s
WRITE: 3608.9MB/s 3576.3MB/s 5785.4MB/s
READ: 1824.3MB/s 1821.6MB/s 1997.5MB/s
WRITE: 1819.8MB/s 1817.4MB/s 1992.5MB/s
READ: 1765.7MB/s 1768.3MB/s 1937.3MB/s
WRITE: 1767.5MB/s 1769.1MB/s 1939.2MB/s
jobs5
READ: 18663MB/s 18986MB/s 18823MB/s
READ: 16659MB/s 16605MB/s 16954MB/s
WRITE: 3912.4MB/s 3888.7MB/s 6126.9MB/s
WRITE: 3506.4MB/s 3442.5MB/s 5519.3MB/s
READ: 1798.2MB/s 1746.5MB/s 1935.8MB/s
WRITE: 1792.7MB/s 1740.7MB/s 1929.1MB/s
READ: 1727.6MB/s 1658.2MB/s 1917.3MB/s
WRITE: 1726.5MB/s 1657.2MB/s 1916.6MB/s
jobs6
READ: 21017MB/s 20922MB/s 21162MB/s
READ: 19022MB/s 19140MB/s 18770MB/s
WRITE: 3968.2MB/s 4037.7MB/s 6620.8MB/s
WRITE: 3643.5MB/s 3590.2MB/s 6027.5MB/s
READ: 1871.8MB/s 1880.5MB/s 2049.9MB/s
WRITE: 1867.8MB/s 1877.2MB/s 2046.2MB/s
READ: 1755.8MB/s 1710.3MB/s 1964.7MB/s
WRITE: 1750.5MB/s 1705.9MB/s 1958.8MB/s
jobs7
READ: 21103MB/s 20677MB/s 21482MB/s
READ: 18522MB/s 18379MB/s 19443MB/s
WRITE: 4022.5MB/s 4067.4MB/s 6755.9MB/s
WRITE: 3691.7MB/s 3695.5MB/s 5925.6MB/s
READ: 1841.5MB/s 1933.9MB/s 2090.5MB/s
WRITE: 1842.7MB/s 1935.3MB/s 2091.9MB/s
READ: 1832.4MB/s 1856.4MB/s 1971.5MB/s
WRITE: 1822.3MB/s 1846.2MB/s 1960.6MB/s
jobs8
READ: 20463MB/s 20194MB/s 20862MB/s
READ: 18178MB/s 17978MB/s 18299MB/s
WRITE: 4085.9MB/s 4060.2MB/s 7023.8MB/s
WRITE: 3776.3MB/s 3737.9MB/s 6278.2MB/s
READ: 1957.6MB/s 1944.4MB/s 2109.5MB/s
WRITE: 1959.2MB/s 1946.2MB/s 2111.4MB/s
READ: 1900.6MB/s 1885.7MB/s 2082.1MB/s
WRITE: 1896.2MB/s 1881.4MB/s 2078.3MB/s
jobs9
READ: 19692MB/s 19734MB/s 19334MB/s
READ: 17678MB/s 18249MB/s 17666MB/s
WRITE: 4004.7MB/s 4064.8MB/s 6990.7MB/s
WRITE: 3724.7MB/s 3772.1MB/s 6193.6MB/s
READ: 1953.7MB/s 1967.3MB/s 2105.6MB/s
WRITE: 1953.4MB/s 1966.7MB/s 2104.1MB/s
READ: 1860.4MB/s 1897.4MB/s 2068.5MB/s
WRITE: 1858.9MB/s 1895.9MB/s 2066.8MB/s
jobs10
READ: 19730MB/s 19579MB/s 19492MB/s
READ: 18028MB/s 18018MB/s 18221MB/s
WRITE: 4027.3MB/s 4090.6MB/s 7020.1MB/s
WRITE: 3810.5MB/s 3846.8MB/s 6426.8MB/s
READ: 1956.1MB/s 1994.6MB/s 2145.2MB/s
WRITE: 1955.9MB/s 1993.5MB/s 2144.8MB/s
READ: 1852.8MB/s 1911.6MB/s 2075.8MB/s
WRITE: 1855.7MB/s 1914.6MB/s 2078.1MB/s
perf stat
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================================================================
jobs1
stalled-cycles-frontend 23,174,811,209 ( 38.21%) 23,220,254,188 ( 38.25%) 23,061,406,918 ( 38.34%)
stalled-cycles-backend 11,514,174,638 ( 18.98%) 11,696,722,657 ( 19.27%) 11,370,852,810 ( 18.90%)
instructions 73,925,005,782 ( 1.22) 73,903,177,632 ( 1.22) 73,507,201,037 ( 1.22)
branches 14,455,124,835 ( 756.063) 14,455,184,779 ( 755.281) 14,378,599,509 ( 758.546)
branch-misses 69,801,336 ( 0.48%) 80,225,529 ( 0.55%) 72,044,726 ( 0.50%)
jobs2
stalled-cycles-frontend 49,912,741,782 ( 46.11%) 50,101,189,290 ( 45.95%) 32,874,195,633 ( 35.11%)
stalled-cycles-backend 27,080,366,230 ( 25.02%) 27,949,970,232 ( 25.63%) 16,461,222,706 ( 17.58%)
instructions 122,831,629,690 ( 1.13) 122,919,846,419 ( 1.13) 121,924,786,775 ( 1.30)
branches 23,725,889,239 ( 692.663) 23,733,547,140 ( 688.062) 23,553,950,311 ( 794.794)
branch-misses 90,733,041 ( 0.38%) 96,320,895 ( 0.41%) 84,561,092 ( 0.36%)
jobs3
stalled-cycles-frontend 66,437,834,608 ( 45.58%) 63,534,923,344 ( 43.69%) 42,101,478,505 ( 33.19%)
stalled-cycles-backend 34,940,799,661 ( 23.97%) 34,774,043,148 ( 23.91%) 21,163,324,388 ( 16.68%)
instructions 171,692,121,862 ( 1.18) 171,775,373,044 ( 1.18) 170,353,542,261 ( 1.34)
branches 32,968,962,622 ( 628.723) 32,987,739,894 ( 630.512) 32,729,463,918 ( 717.027)
branch-misses 111,522,732 ( 0.34%) 110,472,894 ( 0.33%) 99,791,291 ( 0.30%)
jobs4
stalled-cycles-frontend 98,741,701,675 ( 49.72%) 94,797,349,965 ( 47.59%) 54,535,655,381 ( 33.53%)
stalled-cycles-backend 54,642,609,615 ( 27.51%) 55,233,554,408 ( 27.73%) 27,882,323,541 ( 17.14%)
instructions 220,884,807,851 ( 1.11) 220,930,887,273 ( 1.11) 218,926,845,851 ( 1.35)
branches 42,354,518,180 ( 592.105) 42,362,770,587 ( 590.452) 41,955,552,870 ( 716.154)
branch-misses 138,093,449 ( 0.33%) 131,295,286 ( 0.31%) 121,794,771 ( 0.29%)
jobs5
stalled-cycles-frontend 116,219,747,212 ( 48.14%) 110,310,397,012 ( 46.29%) 66,373,082,723 ( 33.70%)
stalled-cycles-backend 66,325,434,776 ( 27.48%) 64,157,087,914 ( 26.92%) 32,999,097,299 ( 16.76%)
instructions 270,615,008,466 ( 1.12) 270,546,409,525 ( 1.14) 268,439,910,948 ( 1.36)
branches 51,834,046,557 ( 599.108) 51,811,867,722 ( 608.883) 51,412,576,077 ( 729.213)
branch-misses 158,197,086 ( 0.31%) 142,639,805 ( 0.28%) 133,425,455 ( 0.26%)
jobs6
stalled-cycles-frontend 138,009,414,492 ( 48.23%) 139,063,571,254 ( 48.80%) 75,278,568,278 ( 32.80%)
stalled-cycles-backend 79,211,949,650 ( 27.68%) 79,077,241,028 ( 27.75%) 37,735,797,899 ( 16.44%)
instructions 319,763,993,731 ( 1.12) 319,937,782,834 ( 1.12) 316,663,600,784 ( 1.38)
branches 61,219,433,294 ( 595.056) 61,250,355,540 ( 598.215) 60,523,446,617 ( 733.706)
branch-misses 169,257,123 ( 0.28%) 154,898,028 ( 0.25%) 141,180,587 ( 0.23%)
jobs7
stalled-cycles-frontend 162,974,812,119 ( 49.20%) 159,290,061,987 ( 48.43%) 88,046,641,169 ( 33.21%)
stalled-cycles-backend 92,223,151,661 ( 27.84%) 91,667,904,406 ( 27.87%) 44,068,454,971 ( 16.62%)
instructions 369,516,432,430 ( 1.12) 369,361,799,063 ( 1.12) 365,290,380,661 ( 1.38)
branches 70,795,673,950 ( 594.220) 70,743,136,124 ( 597.876) 69,803,996,038 ( 732.822)
branch-misses 181,708,327 ( 0.26%) 165,767,821 ( 0.23%) 150,109,797 ( 0.22%)
jobs8
stalled-cycles-frontend 185,000,017,027 ( 49.30%) 182,334,345,473 ( 48.37%) 99,980,147,041 ( 33.26%)
stalled-cycles-backend 105,753,516,186 ( 28.18%) 107,937,830,322 ( 28.63%) 51,404,177,181 ( 17.10%)
instructions 418,153,161,055 ( 1.11) 418,308,565,828 ( 1.11) 413,653,475,581 ( 1.38)
branches 80,035,882,398 ( 592.296) 80,063,204,510 ( 589.843) 79,024,105,589 ( 730.530)
branch-misses 199,764,528 ( 0.25%) 177,936,926 ( 0.22%) 160,525,449 ( 0.20%)
jobs9
stalled-cycles-frontend 210,941,799,094 ( 49.63%) 204,714,679,254 ( 48.55%) 114,251,113,756 ( 33.96%)
stalled-cycles-backend 122,640,849,067 ( 28.85%) 122,188,553,256 ( 28.98%) 58,360,041,127 ( 17.35%)
instructions 468,151,025,415 ( 1.10) 467,354,869,323 ( 1.11) 462,665,165,216 ( 1.38)
branches 89,657,067,510 ( 585.628) 89,411,550,407 ( 588.990) 88,360,523,943 ( 730.151)
branch-misses 218,292,301 ( 0.24%) 191,701,247 ( 0.21%) 178,535,678 ( 0.20%)
jobs10
stalled-cycles-frontend 233,595,958,008 ( 49.81%) 227,540,615,689 ( 49.11%) 160,341,979,938 ( 43.07%)
stalled-cycles-backend 136,153,676,021 ( 29.03%) 133,635,240,742 ( 28.84%) 65,909,135,465 ( 17.70%)
instructions 517,001,168,497 ( 1.10) 516,210,976,158 ( 1.11) 511,374,038,613 ( 1.37)
branches 98,911,641,329 ( 585.796) 98,700,069,712 ( 591.583) 97,646,761,028 ( 728.712)
branch-misses 232,341,823 ( 0.23%) 199,256,308 ( 0.20%) 183,135,268 ( 0.19%)
per-cpu streams tend to cause significantly less stalled cycles; execute
less branches and hit less branch-misses.
perf stat reported execution time
4 streams 8 streams per-cpu
====================================================================
jobs1
seconds elapsed 20.909073870 20.875670495 20.817838540
jobs2
seconds elapsed 18.529488399 18.720566469 16.356103108
jobs3
seconds elapsed 18.991159531 18.991340812 16.766216066
jobs4
seconds elapsed 19.560643828 19.551323547 16.246621715
jobs5
seconds elapsed 24.746498464 25.221646740 20.696112444
jobs6
seconds elapsed 28.258181828 28.289765505 22.885688857
jobs7
seconds elapsed 32.632490241 31.909125381 26.272753738
jobs8
seconds elapsed 35.651403851 36.027596308 29.108024711
jobs9
seconds elapsed 40.569362365 40.024227989 32.898204012
jobs10
seconds elapsed 44.673112304 43.874898137 35.632952191
Please see
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146166970727530
Link: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=146174716719650
for more test results (under low memory conditions).
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-05-21 02:59:51 +03:00
|
|
|
error = zcomp_init(comp);
|
2015-09-18 02:01:40 +03:00
|
|
|
if (error) {
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
kfree(comp);
|
2015-09-18 02:01:40 +03:00
|
|
|
return ERR_PTR(error);
|
zram: introduce compressing backend abstraction
ZRAM performs direct LZO compression algorithm calls, making it the one
and only option. While LZO is generally performs well, LZ4 algorithm
tends to have a faster decompression (see http://code.google.com/p/lz4/
for full report)
Name Ratio C.speed D.speed
MB/s MB/s
LZ4 (r101) 2.084 422 1820
LZO 2.06 2.106 414 600
Thus, users who have mostly read (decompress) usage scenarious or mixed
workflow (writes with relatively high read ops number) will benefit from
using LZ4 compression backend.
Introduce compressing backend abstraction zcomp in order to support
multiple compression algorithms with the following set of operations:
.create
.destroy
.compress
.decompress
Schematically zram write() usually contains the following steps:
0) preparation (decompression of partioal IO, etc.)
1) lock buffer_lock mutex (protects meta compress buffers)
2) compress (using meta compress buffers)
3) alloc and map zs_pool object
4) copy compressed data (from meta compress buffers) to object allocated by 3)
5) free previous pool page, assign a new one
6) unlock buffer_lock mutex
As we can see, compressing buffers must remain untouched from 1) to 4),
because, otherwise, concurrent write() can overwrite data. At the same
time, zram_meta must be aware of a) specific compression algorithm memory
requirements and b) necessary locking to protect compression buffers. To
remove requirement a) new struct zcomp_strm introduced, which contains a
compress/decompress `buffer' and compression algorithm `private' part.
While struct zcomp implements zcomp_strm stream handling and locking and
removes requirement b) from zram meta. zcomp ->create() and ->destroy(),
respectively, allocate and deallocate algorithm specific zcomp_strm
`private' part.
Every zcomp has zcomp stream and mutex to protect its compression stream.
Stream usage semantics remains the same -- only one write can hold stream
lock and use its buffers. zcomp_strm_find() turns caller into exclusive
user of a stream (holding stream mutex until zram release stream), and
zcomp_strm_release() makes zcomp stream available (unlock the stream
mutex). Hence no concurrent write (compression) operations possible at
the moment.
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base patched
--------------------------------------------------
Initial write 597992.91 591660.58
Rewrite 609674.34 616054.97
Read 2404771.75 2452909.12
Re-read 2459216.81 2470074.44
Reverse Read 1652769.66 1589128.66
Stride read 2202441.81 2202173.31
Random read 2236311.47 2276565.31
Mixed workload 1423760.41 1709760.06
Random write 579584.08 615933.86
Pwrite 597550.02 594933.70
Pread 1703672.53 1718126.72
Fwrite 1330497.06 1461054.00
Fread 3922851.00 3957242.62
Usage examples:
comp = zcomp_create(NAME) /* NAME e.g. "lzo" */
which initialises compressing backend if requested algorithm is supported.
Compress:
zstrm = zcomp_strm_find(comp)
zcomp_compress(comp, zstrm, src, &dst_len)
[..] /* copy compressed data */
zcomp_strm_release(comp, zstrm)
Decompress:
zcomp_decompress(comp, src, src_len, dst);
Free compessing backend and its zcomp stream:
zcomp_destroy(comp)
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-08 02:38:11 +04:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return comp;
|
|
|
|
}
|