Existing zram (zcomp) implementation has only one compression stream
(buffer and algorithm private part), so in order to prevent data
corruption only one write (compress operation) can use this compression
stream, forcing all concurrent write operations to wait for stream lock
to be released. This patch changes zcomp to keep a compression streams
list of user-defined size (via sysfs device attr). Each write operation
still exclusively holds compression stream, the difference is that we
can have N write operations (depending on size of streams list)
executing in parallel. See TEST section later in commit message for
performance data.
Introduce struct zcomp_strm_multi and a set of functions to manage
zcomp_strm stream access. zcomp_strm_multi has a list of idle
zcomp_strm structs, spinlock to protect idle list and wait queue, making
it possible to perform parallel compressions.
The following set of functions added:
- zcomp_strm_multi_find()/zcomp_strm_multi_release()
find and release a compression stream, implement required locking
- zcomp_strm_multi_create()/zcomp_strm_multi_destroy()
create and destroy zcomp_strm_multi
zcomp ->strm_find() and ->strm_release() callbacks are set during
initialisation to zcomp_strm_multi_find()/zcomp_strm_multi_release()
correspondingly.
Each time zcomp issues a zcomp_strm_multi_find() call, the following set
of operations performed:
- spin lock strm_lock
- if idle list is not empty, remove zcomp_strm from idle list, spin
unlock and return zcomp stream pointer to caller
- if idle list is empty, current adds itself to wait queue. it will be
awaken by zcomp_strm_multi_release() caller.
zcomp_strm_multi_release():
- spin lock strm_lock
- add zcomp stream to idle list
- spin unlock, wake up sleeper
Minchan Kim reported that spinlock-based locking scheme has demonstrated
a severe perfomance regression for single compression stream case,
comparing to mutex-based (see https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/2/18/16)
base spinlock mutex
==Initial write ==Initial write ==Initial write
records: 5 records: 5 records: 5
avg: 1642424.35 avg: 699610.40 avg: 1655583.71
std: 39890.95(2.43%) std: 232014.19(33.16%) std: 52293.96
max: 1690170.94 max: 1163473.45 max: 1697164.75
min: 1568669.52 min: 573429.88 min: 1553410.23
==Rewrite ==Rewrite ==Rewrite
records: 5 records: 5 records: 5
avg: 1611775.39 avg: 501406.64 avg: 1684419.11
std: 17144.58(1.06%) std: 15354.41(3.06%) std: 18367.42
max: 1641800.95 max: 531356.78 max: 1706445.84
min: 1593515.27 min: 488817.78 min: 1655335.73
When only one compression stream available, mutex with spin on owner
tends to perform much better than frequent wait_event()/wake_up(). This
is why single stream implemented as a special case with mutex locking.
Introduce and document zram device attribute max_comp_streams. This
attr shows and stores current zcomp's max number of zcomp streams
(max_strm). Extend zcomp's zcomp_create() with `max_strm' parameter.
`max_strm' limits the number of zcomp_strm structs in compression
backend's idle list (max_comp_streams).
max_comp_streams used during initialisation as follows:
-- passing to zcomp_create() max_strm equals to 1 will initialise zcomp
using single compression stream zcomp_strm_single (mutex-based locking).
-- passing to zcomp_create() max_strm greater than 1 will initialise zcomp
using multi compression stream zcomp_strm_multi (spinlock-based locking).
default max_comp_streams value is 1, meaning that zram with single stream
will be initialised.
Later patch will introduce configuration knob to change max_comp_streams
on already initialised and used zcomp.
TEST
iozone -t 3 -R -r 16K -s 60M -I +Z
test base 1 strm (mutex) 3 strm (spinlock)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial write 589286.78 583518.39 718011.05
Rewrite 604837.97 596776.38 1515125.72
Random write 584120.11 595714.58 1388850.25
Pwrite 535731.17 541117.38 739295.27
Fwrite 1418083.88 1478612.72 1484927.06
Usage example:
set max_comp_streams to 4
echo 4 > /sys/block/zram0/max_comp_streams
show current max_comp_streams (default value is 1).
cat /sys/block/zram0/max_comp_streams
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>
Document `failed_reads' and `failed_writes' device attributes.
Remove info about `discard' - there is no such zram attr.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Cc: 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>
Remove the old private compcache project address so upcoming patches
should be sent to LKML because we Linux kernel community will take care.
Signed-off-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>
Zram has lived in staging for a LONG LONG time and have been
fixed/improved by many contributors so code is clean and stable now. Of
course, there are lots of product using zram in real practice.
The major TV companys have used zram as swap since two years ago and
recently our production team released android smart phone with zram
which is used as swap, too and recently Android Kitkat start to use zram
for small memory smart phone. And there was a report Google released
their ChromeOS with zram, too and cyanogenmod have been used zram long
time ago. And I heard some disto have used zram block device for tmpfs.
In addition, I saw many report from many other peoples. For example,
Lubuntu start to use it.
The benefit of zram is very clear. With my experience, one of the
benefit was to remove jitter of video application with backgroud memory
pressure. It would be effect of efficient memory usage by compression
but more issue is whether swap is there or not in the system. Recent
mobile platforms have used JAVA so there are many anonymous pages. But
embedded system normally are reluctant to use eMMC or SDCard as swap
because there is wear-leveling and latency issues so if we do not use
swap, it means we can't reclaim anoymous pages and at last, we could
encounter OOM kill. :(
Although we have real storage as swap, it was a problem, too. Because
it sometime ends up making system very unresponsible caused by slow swap
storage performance.
Quote from Luigi on Google
"Since Chrome OS was mentioned: the main reason why we don't use swap
to a disk (rotating or SSD) is because it doesn't degrade gracefully
and leads to a bad interactive experience. Generally we prefer to
manage RAM at a higher level, by transparently killing and restarting
processes. But we noticed that zram is fast enough to be competitive
with the latter, and it lets us make more efficient use of the
available RAM. " and he announced.
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg57717.html
Other uses case is to use zram for block device. Zram is block device
so anyone can format the block device and mount on it so some guys on
the internet start zram as /var/tmp.
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-838198-start-0.html
Let's promote zram and enhance/maintain it instead of removing.
Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Acked-by: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>
Acked-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
Cc: Bob Liu <bob.liu@oracle.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Luigi Semenzato <semenzato@google.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Seth Jennings <sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Sergey Senozhatsky