Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1598348 > unrolled thread

memfill v2 now with ARM and x86 implementations

Started byMatthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
First post2017-03-11 16:00 +0100
Last post2017-03-13 06:20 +0100
Articles 2 — 2 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  memfill v2 now with ARM and x86 implementations Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-03-11 16:00 +0100
    Re: memfill v2 now with ARM and x86 implementations Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2017-03-13 06:20 +0100

#1598348 — memfill v2 now with ARM and x86 implementations

FromMatthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Date2017-03-11 16:00 +0100
Subjectmemfill v2 now with ARM and x86 implementations
Message-ID<tjQEW-4bK-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 12:16:44AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> +static inline void zram_fill_page(char *ptr, unsigned long len,
> +					unsigned long value)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +	unsigned long *page = (unsigned long *)ptr;
> +
> +	WARN_ON_ONCE(!IS_ALIGNED(len, sizeof(unsigned long)));
> +
> +	if (likely(value == 0)) {
> +		memset(ptr, 0, len);
> +	} else {
> +		for (i = 0; i < len / sizeof(*page); i++)
> +			page[i] = value;
> +	}
> +}

I've hacked up memset32/memset64 for both ARM and x86 here:

http://git.infradead.org/users/willy/linux-dax.git/shortlog/refs/heads/memfill

Can you do some performance testing and see if it makes a difference?

At this point, I'd probably ask for the first 5 patches in that git
branch to be included, and leave out memfill and the shoddy testsuite.

I haven't actually tested either asm implementation ... only the
C fallback.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1598850

FromMinchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Date2017-03-13 06:20 +0100
Message-ID<tkqyK-3Xf-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1598348
Hi Matthew,

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 06:56:40AM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 12:16:44AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > +static inline void zram_fill_page(char *ptr, unsigned long len,
> > +					unsigned long value)
> > +{
> > +	int i;
> > +	unsigned long *page = (unsigned long *)ptr;
> > +
> > +	WARN_ON_ONCE(!IS_ALIGNED(len, sizeof(unsigned long)));
> > +
> > +	if (likely(value == 0)) {
> > +		memset(ptr, 0, len);
> > +	} else {
> > +		for (i = 0; i < len / sizeof(*page); i++)
> > +			page[i] = value;
> > +	}
> > +}
> 
> I've hacked up memset32/memset64 for both ARM and x86 here:
> 
> http://git.infradead.org/users/willy/linux-dax.git/shortlog/refs/heads/memfill

Thanks for the patch.

> 
> Can you do some performance testing and see if it makes a difference?

I tested that zram is *full* with non-zero 100M dedupable data(i.e.,
it's a ideal case) on x86. With this, I see 7% enhancement.
        
        perf stat -r 10 dd if=/dev/zram0 of=/dev/null

vanilla:        0.232050465 seconds time elapsed ( +-  0.51% )
memset_l:       0.217219387 seconds time elapsed ( +-  0.07% )

I doubt it makes such benefit in read workload which a small percent
non-zero dedup data(e.g., under 3%) but it makes code simple/perform
win.

Thanks.

> 
> At this point, I'd probably ask for the first 5 patches in that git
> branch to be included, and leave out memfill and the shoddy testsuite.
> 
> I haven't actually tested either asm implementation ... only the
> C fallback.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web