linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>
To: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Vitaly Wool <vitaly.wool@konsulko.com>,
	 Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	 Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	 Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
	 Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>,
	Seth Jennings <sjenning@redhat.com>,
	 Dan Streetman <ddstreet@ieee.org>, Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Analyzing zpool allocators / Removing zbud and z3fold
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 13:23:43 +0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKEwX=MELnV5uzMg2sR0iLd9jiwe-Z9sTh1dhDRiescrDce5rA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJD7tkbRF6od-2x_L8-A1QL3=2Ww13sCj4S3i4bNndqF+3+_Vg@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 10:27 AM Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com> wrote:
>
> I did not perform any sophisticated analysis on these histograms, but
> eyeballing them makes it clear that all allocators have somewhat
> similar latencies. zbud is slightly better than zsmalloc, and z3fold
> is slightly worse than zsmalloc. This corresponds naturally to the
> build times in (a).
>
> (c) Maximum size of the zswap pool
>
> *** zsmalloc ***
> 1,137,659,904 bytes = ~1.13G
>
> *** zbud ***
> 1,535,741,952 bytes = ~1.5G
>
> *** z3fold ***
> 1,151,303,680 bytes = ~1.15G
>
> zbud consumes ~32.7% more memory, and z3fold consumes ~1.8% more
> memory. This makes sense because zbud only stores a maximum of two
> compressed pages on each order-0 page, regardless of the compression
> ratio, so it is bound to consume more memory.
>
> -------------------------------- </Results> --------------------------------
>
> According to those results, it seems like zsmalloc is superior to
> z3fold in both efficiency and latency. Zbud has a small latency
> advantage, but that comes with a huge cost in terms of memory
> consumption. Moreover, most known users of zswap are currently using
> zsmalloc. Perhaps some folks are using zbud because it was the default
> allocator up until recently. The only known disadvantage of zsmalloc
> is the dependency on MMU.
>
> Based on that, I think it doesn't make sense to keep all 3 allocators
> going forward. I believe we should start with removing either zbud or
> z3fold, leaving only one allocator supporting MMU. Once zsmalloc
> supports !MMU (if possible), we can keep zsmalloc as the only
> allocator.
>
> Thoughts and feedback are highly appreciated. I tried to CC all the
> interested folks, but others feel free to chime in.

I already voiced my opinion on the other thread, but to reiterate, my
vote is towards deprecating/removing z3fold :)
Unless someone can present a convincing argument/use case/workload,
where z3fold outshines both zbud and zsmalloc, or at least is another
point on the Pareto front of (latency x memory saving).


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-02-22  6:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-02-09  3:27 Yosry Ahmed
2024-02-22  3:54 ` Chengming Zhou
2024-02-22  5:56   ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-02-22  6:23 ` Nhat Pham [this message]
2024-02-22 19:20   ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-02-22  6:46 ` [External] " Zhongkun He

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAKEwX=MELnV5uzMg2sR0iLd9jiwe-Z9sTh1dhDRiescrDce5rA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=nphamcs@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chris@chrisdown.name \
    --cc=chrisl@kernel.org \
    --cc=ddstreet@ieee.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=minchan@kernel.org \
    --cc=senozhatsky@chromium.org \
    --cc=sjenning@redhat.com \
    --cc=vitaly.wool@konsulko.com \
    --cc=yosryahmed@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox