Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1370318
| From | Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: zram: per-cpu compression streams |
| Date | 2016-04-04 02:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rk0z0-387-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <riwCZ-3sy-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <rizAT-5C4-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <riDOb-iF-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <riEqT-P8-39@gated-at.bofh.it> <rj9uF-6rC-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Hello Sergey, On Sat, Apr 02, 2016 at 12:38:29AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > Hello Minchan, > > On (03/31/16 15:34), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > > > I tested with you suggested parameter. > > > In my side, win is better compared to my previous test but it seems > > > your test is so fast. IOW, filesize is small and loops is just 1. > > > Please test filesize=500m loops=10 or 20. > > fio > - loops=10 > - buffer_pattern=0xbadc0ffee > > zram 6G. no intel p-state, deadline IO scheduler, no lockdep (no lock debugging). We are using rw_page so I/O scheduler is not related. Anyway, I configured my machine as you said but still see 10~20% enhance. :( Hmm, could you post your .config? I want to investigate why such difference happens between our machines. The reason I want to see such *big enhance* in my machine is that as you know, with per-cpu, zram's write path will lose blockable section so it would make upcoming features's implementation hard. We also should test it in very low memory situation so every write path retry it(i.e., dobule compression). With it, I want to see how many performance can drop. If both test(normal: huge win low memory: small regression) are fine, we can go per-cpu approach at the cost of giving up blockable section. :) Thanks. > > > test 8 streams per-cpu > > #jobs1 > READ: 4118.2MB/s 4105.3MB/s > READ: 3487.7MB/s 3624.9MB/s > WRITE: 2197.8MB/s 2305.1MB/s > WRITE: 1776.2MB/s 1887.5MB/s > READ: 736589KB/s 745648KB/s > WRITE: 736353KB/s 745409KB/s > READ: 679279KB/s 686559KB/s > WRITE: 679093KB/s 686371KB/s > #jobs2 > READ: 6924.6MB/s 7160.2MB/s > READ: 6213.2MB/s 6247.1MB/s > WRITE: 2510.3MB/s 3680.1MB/s > WRITE: 2286.2MB/s 3153.9MB/s > READ: 1163.1MB/s 1333.7MB/s > WRITE: 1163.4MB/s 1332.2MB/s > READ: 1122.9MB/s 1240.3MB/s > WRITE: 1121.9MB/s 1239.2MB/s > #jobs3 > READ: 10304MB/s 10424MB/s > READ: 9014.5MB/s 9014.5MB/s > WRITE: 3883.9MB/s 5373.8MB/s > WRITE: 3549.1MB/s 4576.4MB/s > READ: 1704.4MB/s 1916.8MB/s > WRITE: 1704.9MB/s 1915.9MB/s > READ: 1603.5MB/s 1806.8MB/s > WRITE: 1598.8MB/s 1800.8MB/s > #jobs4 > READ: 13509MB/s 12792MB/s > READ: 10899MB/s 11434MB/s > WRITE: 4027.2MB/s 6272.8MB/s > WRITE: 3902.1MB/s 5389.2MB/s > READ: 2090.9MB/s 2344.4MB/s > WRITE: 2085.2MB/s 2337.1MB/s > READ: 1968.1MB/s 2185.9MB/s > WRITE: 1969.5MB/s 2186.4MB/s > #jobs5 > READ: 12634MB/s 11607MB/s > READ: 9932.7MB/s 9980.6MB/s > WRITE: 4275.8MB/s 5844.3MB/s > WRITE: 4210.1MB/s 5262.3MB/s > READ: 1995.6MB/s 2211.4MB/s > WRITE: 1988.4MB/s 2203.4MB/s > READ: 1930.1MB/s 2191.8MB/s > WRITE: 1929.8MB/s 2190.3MB/s > #jobs6 > READ: 12270MB/s 13012MB/s > READ: 11221MB/s 10815MB/s > WRITE: 4643.4MB/s 6090.9MB/s > WRITE: 4373.6MB/s 5772.8MB/s > READ: 2232.6MB/s 2358.4MB/s > WRITE: 2233.4MB/s 2359.2MB/s > READ: 2082.6MB/s 2285.8MB/s > WRITE: 2075.9MB/s 2278.1MB/s > #jobs7 > READ: 13617MB/s 14172MB/s > READ: 12290MB/s 11734MB/s > WRITE: 5077.3MB/s 6315.7MB/s > WRITE: 4719.4MB/s 5825.1MB/s > READ: 2379.8MB/s 2523.7MB/s > WRITE: 2373.7MB/s 2516.7MB/s > READ: 2287.9MB/s 2362.4MB/s > WRITE: 2283.9MB/s 2358.2MB/s > #jobs8 > READ: 15130MB/s 15533MB/s > READ: 12952MB/s 13077MB/s > WRITE: 5586.6MB/s 7108.2MB/s > WRITE: 5233.5MB/s 6591.3MB/s > READ: 2541.2MB/s 2709.2MB/s > WRITE: 2544.6MB/s 2713.2MB/s > READ: 2450.6MB/s 2590.7MB/s > WRITE: 2449.4MB/s 2589.3MB/s > #jobs9 > READ: 13480MB/s 13909MB/s > READ: 12389MB/s 12000MB/s > WRITE: 5266.8MB/s 6594.9MB/s > WRITE: 4971.6MB/s 6442.2MB/s > READ: 2464.9MB/s 2470.9MB/s > WRITE: 2482.7MB/s 2488.8MB/s > READ: 2171.9MB/s 2402.2MB/s > WRITE: 2174.9MB/s 2405.5MB/s > #jobs10 > READ: 14647MB/s 14667MB/s > READ: 11765MB/s 12032MB/s > WRITE: 5248.7MB/s 6740.4MB/s > WRITE: 4779.8MB/s 5822.8MB/s > READ: 2448.8MB/s 2585.3MB/s > WRITE: 2449.4MB/s 2585.9MB/s > READ: 2290.5MB/s 2409.1MB/s > WRITE: 2290.2MB/s 2409.7MB/s > > -ss
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: zram: per-cpu compression streams Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 09:20 +0100
Re: zram: per-cpu compression streams Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-03-25 00:50 +0100
Re: zram: per-cpu compression streams Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> - 2016-03-25 02:50 +0100
Re: zram: per-cpu compression streams Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-03-28 05:30 +0200
Re: zram: per-cpu compression streams Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> - 2016-03-30 10:40 +0200
Re: zram: per-cpu compression streams Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-03-31 00:20 +0200
Re: zram: per-cpu compression streams Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 03:30 +0200
Re: zram: per-cpu compression streams Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-03-31 08:00 +0200
Re: zram: per-cpu compression streams Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 08:40 +0200
Re: zram: per-cpu compression streams Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 17:50 +0200
Re: zram: per-cpu compression streams Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-04-04 02:30 +0200
csiph-web