Techwizz/kernel-fxtec-pro1x
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity
kernel-fxtec-pro1x/drivers/block/zram/zcomp.h

45 lines
1.3 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

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>
2014-04-07 16:38:11 -06:00
/*
* 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.
*/
#ifndef _ZCOMP_H_
#define _ZCOMP_H_
struct zcomp_strm {
/* compression/decompression buffer */
void *buffer;
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>
2016-07-26 16:22:45 -06:00
struct crypto_comp *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>
2014-04-07 16:38:11 -06:00
};
/* dynamic per-device compression frontend */
struct zcomp {
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>
2016-05-20 17:59:51 -06:00
struct zcomp_strm * __percpu *stream;
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>
2016-07-26 16:22:45 -06:00
const char *name;
zram: Convert to hotplug state machine Install the callbacks via the state machine with multi instance support and let the core invoke the callbacks on the already online CPUs. [bigeasy: wire up the multi instance stuff] Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> Cc: rt@linutronix.de Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161126231350.10321-19-bigeasy@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
2016-11-26 16:13:46 -07:00
struct hlist_node node;
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>
2014-04-07 16:38:11 -06:00
};
zram: Convert to hotplug state machine Install the callbacks via the state machine with multi instance support and let the core invoke the callbacks on the already online CPUs. [bigeasy: wire up the multi instance stuff] Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> Cc: rt@linutronix.de Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161126231350.10321-19-bigeasy@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
2016-11-26 16:13:46 -07:00
int zcomp_cpu_up_prepare(unsigned int cpu, struct hlist_node *node);
int zcomp_cpu_dead(unsigned int cpu, struct hlist_node *node);
zram: make compression algorithm selection possible Add and document `comp_algorithm' device attribute. This attribute allows to show supported compression and currently selected compression algorithms: cat /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm [lzo] lz4 and change selected compression algorithm: echo lzo > /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm 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>
2014-04-07 16:38:17 -06:00
ssize_t zcomp_available_show(const char *comp, char *buf);
zram: check comp algorithm availability earlier Improvement idea by Marcin Jabrzyk. comp_algorithm_store() silently accepts any supplied algorithm name, because zram performs algorithm availability check later, during the device configuration phase in disksize_store() and emits the following error: "zram: Cannot initialise %s compressing backend" this error line is somewhat generic and, besides, can indicate a failed attempt to allocate compression backend's working buffers. add algorithm availability check to comp_algorithm_store(): echo lzz > /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm -bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> Reported-by: Marcin Jabrzyk <m.jabrzyk@samsung.com> Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2015-06-25 16:00:32 -06:00
bool zcomp_available_algorithm(const char *comp);
zram: make compression algorithm selection possible Add and document `comp_algorithm' device attribute. This attribute allows to show supported compression and currently selected compression algorithms: cat /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm [lzo] lz4 and change selected compression algorithm: echo lzo > /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm 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>
2014-04-07 16:38:17 -06:00
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>
2016-05-20 17:59:51 -06:00
struct zcomp *zcomp_create(const char *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>
2014-04-07 16:38:11 -06:00
void zcomp_destroy(struct zcomp *comp);
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>
2016-07-26 16:22:42 -06:00
struct zcomp_strm *zcomp_stream_get(struct zcomp *comp);
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>
2014-04-07 16:38:11 -06:00
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>
2016-07-26 16:22:45 -06:00
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>
2014-04-07 16:38:11 -06:00
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>
2016-07-26 16:22:45 -06:00
int zcomp_decompress(struct zcomp_strm *zstrm,
const void *src, unsigned int src_len, void *dst);
zram: add set_max_streams knob This patch allows to change max_comp_streams on initialised zcomp. Introduce zcomp set_max_streams() knob, zcomp_strm_multi_set_max_streams() and zcomp_strm_single_set_max_streams() callbacks to change streams limit for zcomp_strm_multi and zcomp_strm_single, accordingly. set_max_streams for single steam zcomp does nothing. If user has lowered the limit, then zcomp_strm_multi_set_max_streams() attempts to immediately free extra streams (as much as it can, depending on idle streams availability). Note, this patch does not allow to change stream 'policy' from single to multi stream (or vice versa) on already initialised compression backend. 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>
2014-04-07 16:38:15 -06:00
zram: propagate error to user When we initialized zcomp with single, we couldn't change max_comp_streams without zram reset but current interface doesn't show any error to user and even it changes max_comp_streams's value without any effect so it would make user very confusing. This patch prevents max_comp_streams's change when zcomp was initialized as single zcomp and emit the error to user(ex, echo). [akpm@linux-foundation.org: don't return with the lock held, per Sergey] [fengguang.wu@intel.com: fix coccinelle warnings] Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org> Cc: Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@redhat.com> Acked-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com> Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-07 16:38:21 -06:00
bool zcomp_set_max_streams(struct zcomp *comp, int num_strm);
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>
2014-04-07 16:38:11 -06:00
#endif /* _ZCOMP_H_ */
Reference in a new issue Copy permalink