Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932082Ab1BICbp (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Feb 2011 21:31:45 -0500 Received: from mail-vw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.212.46]:64446 "EHLO mail-vw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756022Ab1BICbn (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Feb 2011 21:31:43 -0500 Message-ID: <4D51FCB0.9040101@vflare.org> Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 21:32:16 -0500 From: Nitin Gupta User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101209 Fedora/3.1.7-0.35.b3pre.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dan Magenheimer CC: gregkh@suse.de, Chris Mason , akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, matthew@wil.cx, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, jeremy@goop.org, Kurt Hackel , npiggin@kernel.dk, riel@redhat.com, Konrad Wilk , mel@csn.ul.ie, minchan.kim@gmail.com, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn, tytso@mit.edu, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, hughd@google.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, Matt Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/3] drivers/staging: zcache: dynamic page cache/swap compression References: <20110207032407.GA27404@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <1ddd01a8-591a-42bc-8bb3-561843b31acb@default> In-Reply-To: <1ddd01a8-591a-42bc-8bb3-561843b31acb@default> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1792 Lines: 44 On 02/08/2011 08:03 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote: >> (Historical note: This "new" zcache patchset supercedes both the >> kztmem patchset and the "old" zcache patchset as described in: >> http://lkml.org/lkml/2011/2/5/148) > > (In order to move discussion from the old kztmem patchset to > the new zcache patchset, I am replying here to Matt's email > sent at: https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/2/4/199 ) > >> From: Matt [mailto:jackdachef@gmail.com] > > >> • Coming back to usage of compcache - how about the problem of 60% >> memory fragmentation (according to compcache/zcache wiki, >> http://code.google.com/p/compcache/wiki/Fragmentation) ? >> Could the situation be improved with in-kernel "memory compaction" ? >> I'm not a developer so I don't know exactly how lumpy reclaim/memory >> compaction and xvmalloc would interact with each other > > Nitin is the expert on compcache and xvmalloc, so I will leave > this question unanswered for now. > I'm currently in the process of designing a new allocator that gives predictable memory fragmentation guarantees (at the expense of extra CPU cycles). I've not yet posted details anywhere but many of the ideas are from the "Compact Fit" allocator: http://www.usenix.org/event/usenix08/tech/full_papers/craciunas/craciunas_html/ I'm not sure how much time it will take since I'm not yet done with some of the design details, and then userspace implementation, testing, profiling and finally kernel port. Add to that extra concurrency issues when integrating with zcache! Thanks, Nitin -- 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/