Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758622Ab3CDSbJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Mar 2013 13:31:09 -0500 Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:30068 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758241Ab3CDSbH convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Mar 2013 13:31:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <4e603875-823e-4bc9-afc5-ae85ce4ca0ef@default> Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 10:29:32 -0800 (PST) From: Dan Magenheimer To: Ric Mason Cc: minchan@kernel.org, sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Nitin Gupta , Konrad Wilk , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bob Liu , Luigi Semenzato , Mel Gorman Subject: RE: zsmalloc limitations and related topics References: <0efe9610-1aa5-4aa9-bde9-227acfa969ca@default> <51300702.1050006@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51300702.1050006@gmail.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.7 (607090) [OL 12.0.6665.5003 (x86)] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Source-IP: acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4007 Lines: 96 > From: Ric Mason [mailto:ric.masonn@gmail.com] > Subject: Re: zsmalloc limitations and related topics > > On 02/28/2013 07:24 AM, Dan Magenheimer wrote: > > Hi all -- > > > > I've been doing some experimentation on zsmalloc in preparation > > for my topic proposed for LSFMM13 and have run across some > > perplexing limitations. Those familiar with the intimate details > > of zsmalloc might be well aware of these limitations, but they > > aren't documented or immediately obvious, so I thought it would > > be worthwhile to air them publicly. I've also included some > > measurements from the experimentation and some related thoughts. > > > > (Some of the terms here are unusual and may be used inconsistently > > by different developers so a glossary of definitions of the terms > > used here is appended.) > > > > ZSMALLOC LIMITATIONS > > > > Zsmalloc is used for two zprojects: zram and the out-of-tree > > zswap. Zsmalloc can achieve high density when "full". But: > > > > 1) Zsmalloc has a worst-case density of 0.25 (one zpage per > > four pageframes). > > 2) When not full and especially when nearly-empty _after_ > > being full, density may fall below 1.0 as a result of > > fragmentation. > > What's the meaning of nearly-empty _after_ being full? Step 1: Add a few (N) pages to zsmalloc. It is "nearly empty". Step 2: Now add many more pages to zsmalloc until allocation limits are reached. It is "full". Step 3: Now remove many pages from zsmalloc until there are N pages remaining. It is now "nearly empty after being full". Fragmentation characteristics are different comparing after Step 1 and after Step 3 even though, in both cases, zsmalloc contains N pages. > > 3) Zsmalloc has a density of exactly 1.0 for any number of > > zpages with zsize >= 0.8. > > 4) Zsmalloc contains several compile-time parameters; > > the best value of these parameters may be very workload > > dependent. > > > > If density == 1.0, that means we are paying the overhead of > > compression+decompression for no space advantage. If > > density < 1.0, that means using zsmalloc is detrimental, > > resulting in worse memory pressure than if it were not used. > > > > WORKLOAD ANALYSIS > > > > These limitations emphasize that the workload used to evaluate > > zsmalloc is very important. Benchmarks that measure data > > Could you share your benchmark? In order that other guys can take > advantage of it. As Seth does, I just used "make" of a kernel. I run it on a full graphical installation of EL6. In order to ensure there is memory pressure, I limit physical memory to 1GB, and use "make -j20". > > throughput or CPU utilization are of questionable value because > > it is the _content_ of the data that is particularly relevant > > for compression. Even more precisely, it is the "entropy" > > of the data that is relevant, because the amount of > > compressibility in the data is related to the entropy: > > I.e. an entirely random pagefull of bits will compress poorly > > and a highly-regular pagefull of bits will compress well. > > Since the zprojects manage a large number of zpages, both > > the mean and distribution of zsize of the workload should > > be "representative". > > > > The workload most widely used to publish results for > > the various zprojects is a kernel-compile using "make -jN" > > where N is artificially increased to impose memory pressure. > > By adding some debug code to zswap, I was able to analyze > > this workload and found the following: > > > > 1) The average page compressed by almost a factor of six > > (mean zsize == 694, stddev == 474) > > stddev is what? Standard deviation. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/