kernel/drivers/block/zram/zcomp.c, branch linux-5.1.y

lib/lzo: separate lzo-rle from lzo

2019-03-08T02:32:03Z

To prevent any issues with persistent data, separate lzo-rle from lzo so that it is treated as a separate algorithm, and lzo is still available. Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190205155944.16007-3-dave.rodgman@arm.com Signed-off-by: Dave Rodgman Cc: David S. Miller Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Herbert Xu Cc: Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer Cc: Matt Sealey Cc: Minchan Kim Cc: Nitin Gupta Cc: Richard Purdie Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky Cc: Sonny Rao Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

zram: remove zlib from the list of recommended algorithms

2017-11-16T02:21:03Z

ZSTD tends to outperform deflate/inflate, thus we remove zlib from the list of recommended algorithms and recommend zstd instead. Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170912050005.3247-2-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky Suggested-by: Minchan Kim Acked-by: Minchan Kim Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

zram: add zstd to the supported algorithms list

2017-11-16T02:21:03Z

Add ZSTD to the list of supported compression algorithms. ZRAM fio perf test: LZO DEFLATE ZSTD #jobs1 WRITE: (2180MB/s) (77.2MB/s) (1429MB/s) WRITE: (1617MB/s) (77.7MB/s) (1202MB/s) READ: (426MB/s) (595MB/s) (1181MB/s) READ: (422MB/s) (572MB/s) (1020MB/s) READ: (318MB/s) (67.8MB/s) (563MB/s) WRITE: (318MB/s) (67.9MB/s) (564MB/s) READ: (336MB/s) (68.3MB/s) (583MB/s) WRITE: (335MB/s) (68.2MB/s) (582MB/s) #jobs2 WRITE: (3441MB/s) (152MB/s) (2141MB/s) WRITE: (2507MB/s) (147MB/s) (1888MB/s) READ: (801MB/s) (1146MB/s) (1890MB/s) READ: (767MB/s) (1096MB/s) (2073MB/s) READ: (621MB/s) (126MB/s) (1009MB/s) WRITE: (621MB/s) (126MB/s) (1009MB/s) READ: (656MB/s) (125MB/s) (1075MB/s) WRITE: (657MB/s) (126MB/s) (1077MB/s) #jobs3 WRITE: (4772MB/s) (225MB/s) (3394MB/s) WRITE: (3905MB/s) (211MB/s) (2939MB/s) READ: (1216MB/s) (1608MB/s) (3218MB/s) READ: (1159MB/s) (1431MB/s) (2981MB/s) READ: (906MB/s) (156MB/s) (1457MB/s) WRITE: (907MB/s) (156MB/s) (1458MB/s) READ: (953MB/s) (158MB/s) (1595MB/s) WRITE: (952MB/s) (157MB/s) (1593MB/s) #jobs4 WRITE: (6036MB/s) (265MB/s) (4469MB/s) WRITE: (5059MB/s) (263MB/s) (3951MB/s) READ: (1618MB/s) (2066MB/s) (4276MB/s) READ: (1573MB/s) (1942MB/s) (3830MB/s) READ: (1202MB/s) (227MB/s) (1971MB/s) WRITE: (1200MB/s) (227MB/s) (1968MB/s) READ: (1265MB/s) (226MB/s) (2116MB/s) WRITE: (1264MB/s) (226MB/s) (2114MB/s) #jobs5 WRITE: (5339MB/s) (233MB/s) (3781MB/s) WRITE: (4298MB/s) (234MB/s) (3276MB/s) READ: (1626MB/s) (2048MB/s) (4081MB/s) READ: (1567MB/s) (1929MB/s) (3758MB/s) READ: (1174MB/s) (205MB/s) (1747MB/s) WRITE: (1173MB/s) (204MB/s) (1746MB/s) READ: (1214MB/s) (208MB/s) (1890MB/s) WRITE: (1215MB/s) (208MB/s) (1892MB/s) #jobs6 WRITE: (5666MB/s) (270MB/s) (4338MB/s) WRITE: (4828MB/s) (267MB/s) (3772MB/s) READ: (1803MB/s) (2058MB/s) (4946MB/s) READ: (1805MB/s) (2156MB/s) (4711MB/s) READ: (1334MB/s) (235MB/s) (2135MB/s) WRITE: (1335MB/s) (235MB/s) (2137MB/s) READ: (1364MB/s) (236MB/s) (2268MB/s) WRITE: (1365MB/s) (237MB/s) (2270MB/s) #jobs7 WRITE: (5474MB/s) (270MB/s) (4300MB/s) WRITE: (4666MB/s) (266MB/s) (3817MB/s) READ: (2022MB/s) (2319MB/s) (5472MB/s) READ: (1924MB/s) (2260MB/s) (5031MB/s) READ: (1369MB/s) (242MB/s) (2153MB/s) WRITE: (1370MB/s) (242MB/s) (2155MB/s) READ: (1499MB/s) (246MB/s) (2310MB/s) WRITE: (1497MB/s) (246MB/s) (2307MB/s) #jobs8 WRITE: (5558MB/s) (273MB/s) (4439MB/s) WRITE: (4763MB/s) (271MB/s) (3918MB/s) READ: (2201MB/s) (2599MB/s) (6062MB/s) READ: (2105MB/s) (2463MB/s) (5413MB/s) READ: (1490MB/s) (252MB/s) (2238MB/s) WRITE: (1488MB/s) (252MB/s) (2236MB/s) READ: (1566MB/s) (254MB/s) (2434MB/s) WRITE: (1568MB/s) (254MB/s) (2437MB/s) #jobs9 WRITE: (5120MB/s) (264MB/s) (4035MB/s) WRITE: (4531MB/s) (267MB/s) (3740MB/s) READ: (1940MB/s) (2258MB/s) (4986MB/s) READ: (2024MB/s) (2387MB/s) (4871MB/s) READ: (1343MB/s) (246MB/s) (2038MB/s) WRITE: (1342MB/s) (246MB/s) (2037MB/s) READ: (1553MB/s) (238MB/s) (2243MB/s) WRITE: (1552MB/s) (238MB/s) (2242MB/s) #jobs10 WRITE: (5345MB/s) (271MB/s) (3988MB/s) WRITE: (4750MB/s) (254MB/s) (3668MB/s) READ: (1876MB/s) (2363MB/s) (5150MB/s) READ: (1990MB/s) (2256MB/s) (5080MB/s) READ: (1355MB/s) (250MB/s) (2019MB/s) WRITE: (1356MB/s) (251MB/s) (2020MB/s) READ: (1490MB/s) (252MB/s) (2202MB/s) WRITE: (1488MB/s) (252MB/s) (2199MB/s) jobs1 perfstat instructions 52,065,555,710 ( 0.79) 855,731,114,587 ( 2.64) 54,280,709,944 ( 1.40) branches 14,020,427,116 ( 725.847) 101,733,449,582 (1074.521) 11,170,591,067 ( 992.869) branch-misses 22,626,174 ( 0.16%) 274,197,885 ( 0.27%) 25,915,805 ( 0.23%) jobs2 perfstat instructions 103,633,110,402 ( 0.75) 1,710,822,100,914 ( 2.59) 107,879,874,104 ( 1.28) branches 27,931,237,282 ( 679.203) 203,298,267,479 (1037.326) 22,185,350,842 ( 884.427) branch-misses 46,103,811 ( 0.17%) 533,747,204 ( 0.26%) 49,682,483 ( 0.22%) jobs3 perfstat instructions 154,857,283,657 ( 0.76) 2,565,748,974,197 ( 2.57) 161,515,435,813 ( 1.31) branches 41,759,490,355 ( 670.529) 304,905,605,277 ( 978.765) 33,215,805,907 ( 888.003) branch-misses 74,263,293 ( 0.18%) 759,746,240 ( 0.25%) 76,841,196 ( 0.23%) jobs4 perfstat instructions 206,215,849,076 ( 0.75) 3,420,169,460,897 ( 2.60) 215,003,061,664 ( 1.31) branches 55,632,141,739 ( 666.501) 406,394,977,433 ( 927.241) 44,214,322,251 ( 883.532) branch-misses 102,287,788 ( 0.18%) 1,098,617,314 ( 0.27%) 103,891,040 ( 0.23%) jobs5 perfstat instructions 258,711,315,588 ( 0.67) 4,275,657,533,244 ( 2.23) 269,332,235,685 ( 1.08) branches 69,802,821,166 ( 588.823) 507,996,211,252 ( 797.036) 55,450,846,129 ( 735.095) branch-misses 129,217,214 ( 0.19%) 1,243,284,991 ( 0.24%) 173,512,278 ( 0.31%) jobs6 perfstat instructions 312,796,166,008 ( 0.61) 5,133,896,344,660 ( 2.02) 323,658,769,588 ( 1.04) branches 84,372,488,583 ( 520.541) 610,310,494,402 ( 697.642) 66,683,292,992 ( 693.939) branch-misses 159,438,978 ( 0.19%) 1,396,368,563 ( 0.23%) 174,406,934 ( 0.26%) jobs7 perfstat instructions 363,211,372,930 ( 0.56) 5,988,205,600,879 ( 1.75) 377,824,674,156 ( 0.93) branches 98,057,013,765 ( 463.117) 711,841,255,974 ( 598.762) 77,879,009,954 ( 600.443) branch-misses 199,513,153 ( 0.20%) 1,507,651,077 ( 0.21%) 248,203,369 ( 0.32%) jobs8 perfstat instructions 413,960,354,615 ( 0.52) 6,842,918,558,378 ( 1.45) 431,938,486,581 ( 0.83) branches 111,812,574,884 ( 414.224) 813,299,084,518 ( 491.173) 89,062,699,827 ( 517.795) branch-misses 233,584,845 ( 0.21%) 1,531,593,921 ( 0.19%) 286,818,489 ( 0.32%) jobs9 perfstat instructions 465,976,220,300 ( 0.53) 7,698,467,237,372 ( 1.47) 486,352,600,321 ( 0.84) branches 125,931,456,162 ( 424.063) 915,207,005,715 ( 498.192) 100,370,404,090 ( 517.439) branch-misses 256,992,445 ( 0.20%) 1,782,809,816 ( 0.19%) 345,239,380 ( 0.34%) jobs10 perfstat instructions 517,406,372,715 ( 0.53) 8,553,527,312,900 ( 1.48) 540,732,653,094 ( 0.84) branches 139,839,780,676 ( 427.732) 1,016,737,699,389 ( 503.172) 111,696,557,638 ( 516.750) branch-misses 259,595,561 ( 0.19%) 1,952,570,279 ( 0.19%) 357,818,661 ( 0.32%) seconds elapsed 20.630411534 96.084546565 12.743373571 seconds elapsed 22.292627625 100.984155001 14.407413560 seconds elapsed 22.396016966 110.344880848 14.032201392 seconds elapsed 22.517330949 113.351459170 14.243074935 seconds elapsed 28.548305104 156.515193765 19.159286861 seconds elapsed 30.453538116 164.559937678 19.362492717 seconds elapsed 33.467108086 188.486827481 21.492612173 seconds elapsed 35.617727591 209.602677783 23.256422492 seconds elapsed 42.584239509 243.959902566 28.458540338 seconds elapsed 47.683632526 269.635248851 31.542404137 Over all, ZSTD has slower WRITE, but much faster READ (perhaps a static compression buffer used during the test helped ZSTD a lot), which results in faster test results. Memory consumption (zram mm_stat file): zram LZO mm_stat mm_stat (jobs1): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33558528 0 0 mm_stat (jobs2): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33558528 0 0 mm_stat (jobs3): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33562624 0 0 mm_stat (jobs4): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33558528 0 0 mm_stat (jobs5): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33558528 0 0 mm_stat (jobs6): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33562624 0 0 mm_stat (jobs7): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33566720 0 0 mm_stat (jobs8): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33558528 0 0 mm_stat (jobs9): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33558528 0 0 mm_stat (jobs10): 2147483648 23068672 33558528 0 33562624 0 0 zram DEFLATE mm_stat mm_stat (jobs1): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0 mm_stat (jobs2): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0 mm_stat (jobs3): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0 mm_stat (jobs4): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0 mm_stat (jobs5): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0 mm_stat (jobs6): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0 mm_stat (jobs7): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25190400 0 0 mm_stat (jobs8): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25190400 0 0 mm_stat (jobs9): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0 mm_stat (jobs10): 2147483648 16252928 25178112 0 25178112 0 0 zram ZSTD mm_stat mm_stat (jobs1): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0 mm_stat (jobs2): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0 mm_stat (jobs3): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16785408 0 0 mm_stat (jobs4): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0 mm_stat (jobs5): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0 mm_stat (jobs6): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0 mm_stat (jobs7): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0 mm_stat (jobs8): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0 mm_stat (jobs9): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16785408 0 0 mm_stat (jobs10): 2147483648 11010048 16781312 0 16781312 0 0 ================================================================================== Official benchmarks [1]: Compressor name Ratio Compression Decompress. zstd 1.1.3 -1 2.877 430 MB/s 1110 MB/s zlib 1.2.8 -1 2.743 110 MB/s 400 MB/s brotli 0.5.2 -0 2.708 400 MB/s 430 MB/s quicklz 1.5.0 -1 2.238 550 MB/s 710 MB/s lzo1x 2.09 -1 2.108 650 MB/s 830 MB/s lz4 1.7.5 2.101 720 MB/s 3600 MB/s snappy 1.1.3 2.091 500 MB/s 1650 MB/s lzf 3.6 -1 2.077 400 MB/s 860 MB/s Minchan said: : I did test with my sample data and compared zstd with deflate. zstd's : compress ratio is lower a little bit but compression speed is much faster : 3 times more and decompress speed is too 2 times more. With different : data, it is different but overall, zstd would be better for speed at the : cost of a little lower compress ratio(about 5%) so I believe it's worth to : replace deflate. [1] https://github.com/facebook/zstd Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170912050005.3247-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky Acked-by: Minchan Kim Tested-by: Minchan Kim Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

zram: use __sysfs_match_string() helper

2017-07-10T23:32:31Z

Use __sysfs_match_string() helper instead of open coded variant. Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170609120835.22156-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko Reviewed-by: Sergey Senozhatsky Acked-by: Minchan Kim Cc: Nitin Gupta Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

zram: Convert to hotplug state machine

2016-12-01T23:52:39Z

Install the callbacks via the state machine with multi instance support and let the core invoke the callbacks on the already online CPUs. [bigeasy: wire up the multi instance stuff] Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Gleixner Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky Cc: Minchan Kim Cc: rt@linutronix.de Cc: Nitin Gupta Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161126231350.10321-19-bigeasy@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner

zram: drop gfp_t from zcomp_strm_alloc()

2016-07-26T23:19:19Z

We now allocate streams from CPU_UP hot-plug path, there are no context-dependent stream allocations anymore and we can schedule from zcomp_strm_alloc(). Use GFP_KERNEL directly and drop a gfp_t parameter. Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-9-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky Acked-by: Minchan Kim Cc: Joonsoo Kim Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

zram: add more compression algorithms

2016-07-26T23:19:19Z

Add "deflate", "lz4hc", "842" algorithms to the list of known compression backends. The real availability of those algorithms, however, depends on the corresponding CONFIG_CRYPTO_FOO config options. [sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com: zram-add-more-compression-algorithms-v3] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160604024902.11778-7-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-8-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky Acked-by: Minchan Kim Cc: Joonsoo Kim Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

zram: delete custom lzo/lz4

2016-07-26T23:19:19Z

Remove lzo/lz4 backends, we use crypto API now. [sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com: zram-delete-custom-lzo-lz4-v3] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160604024902.11778-6-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-7-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky Acked-by: Minchan Kim Cc: Joonsoo Kim Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

zram: use crypto api to check alg availability

2016-07-26T23:19:19Z

There is no way to get a string with all the crypto comp algorithms supported by the crypto comp engine, so we need to maintain our own backends list. At the same time we additionally need to use crypto_has_comp() to make sure that the user has requested a compression algorithm that is recognized by the crypto comp engine. Relying on /proc/crypto is not an options here, because it does not show not-yet-inserted compression modules. Example: modprobe zram cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4 modprobe lz4 cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4 name : lz4 driver : lz4-generic module : lz4 So the user can't tell exactly if the lz4 is really supported from /proc/crypto output, unless someone or something has loaded it. This patch also adds crypto_has_comp() to zcomp_available_show(). We store all the compression algorithms names in zcomp's `backends' array, regardless the CONFIG_CRYPTO_FOO configuration, but show only those that are also supported by crypto engine. This helps user to know the exact list of compression algorithms that can be used. Example: module lz4 is not loaded yet, but is supported by the crypto engine. /proc/crypto has no information on this module, while zram's `comp_algorithm' lists it: cat /proc/crypto | grep -i lz4 cat /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm [lzo] lz4 deflate lz4hc 842 We still use the `backends' array to determine if the requested compression backend is known to crypto api. This array, however, may not contain some entries, therefore as the last step we call crypto_has_comp() function which attempts to insmod the requested compression algorithm to determine if crypto api supports it. The advantage of this method is that now we permit the usage of out-of-tree crypto compression modules (implementing S/W or H/W compression). [sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com: zram-use-crypto-api-to-check-alg-availability-v3] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160604024902.11778-4-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-5-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky Acked-by: Minchan Kim Cc: Joonsoo Kim Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

zram: switch to crypto compress API

2016-07-26T23:19:19Z

We don't have an idle zstreams list anymore and our write path now works absolutely differently, preventing preemption during compression. This removes possibilities of read paths preempting writes at wrong places (which could badly affect the performance of both paths) and at the same time opens the door for a move from custom LZO/LZ4 compression backends implementation to a more generic one, using crypto compress API. Joonsoo Kim [1] attempted to do this a while ago, but faced with the need of introducing a new crypto API interface. The root cause was the fact that crypto API compression algorithms require a compression stream structure (in zram terminology) for both compression and decompression ops, while in reality only several of compression algorithms really need it. This resulted in a concept of context-less crypto API compression backends [2]. Both write and read paths, though, would have been executed with the preemption enabled, which in the worst case could have resulted in a decreased worst-case performance, e.g. consider the following case: CPU0 zram_write() spin_lock() take the last idle stream spin_unlock() << preempted >> zram_read() spin_lock() no idle streams spin_unlock() schedule() resuming zram_write compression() but it took me some time to realize that, and it took even longer to evolve zram and to make it ready for crypto API. The key turned out to be -- drop the idle streams list entirely. Without the idle streams list we are free to use compression algorithms that require compression stream for decompression (read), because streams are now placed in per-cpu data and each write path has to disable preemption for compression op, almost completely eliminating the aforementioned case (technically, we still have a small chance, because write path has a fast and a slow paths and the slow path is executed with the preemption enabled; but the frequency of failed fast path is too low). TEST ==== - 4 CPUs, x86_64 system - 3G zram, lzo - fio tests: read, randread, write, randwrite, rw, randrw test script [3] command: ZRAM_SIZE=3G LOG_SUFFIX=XXXX FIO_LOOPS=5 ./zram-fio-test.sh BASE PATCHED jobs1 READ: 2527.2MB/s 2482.7MB/s READ: 2102.7MB/s 2045.0MB/s WRITE: 1284.3MB/s 1324.3MB/s WRITE: 1080.7MB/s 1101.9MB/s READ: 430125KB/s 437498KB/s WRITE: 430538KB/s 437919KB/s READ: 399593KB/s 403987KB/s WRITE: 399910KB/s 404308KB/s jobs2 READ: 8133.5MB/s 7854.8MB/s READ: 7086.6MB/s 6912.8MB/s WRITE: 3177.2MB/s 3298.3MB/s WRITE: 2810.2MB/s 2871.4MB/s READ: 1017.6MB/s 1023.4MB/s WRITE: 1018.2MB/s 1023.1MB/s READ: 977836KB/s 984205KB/s WRITE: 979435KB/s 985814KB/s jobs3 READ: 13557MB/s 13391MB/s READ: 11876MB/s 11752MB/s WRITE: 4641.5MB/s 4682.1MB/s WRITE: 4164.9MB/s 4179.3MB/s READ: 1453.8MB/s 1455.1MB/s WRITE: 1455.1MB/s 1458.2MB/s READ: 1387.7MB/s 1395.7MB/s WRITE: 1386.1MB/s 1394.9MB/s jobs4 READ: 20271MB/s 20078MB/s READ: 18033MB/s 17928MB/s WRITE: 6176.8MB/s 6180.5MB/s WRITE: 5686.3MB/s 5705.3MB/s READ: 2009.4MB/s 2006.7MB/s WRITE: 2007.5MB/s 2004.9MB/s READ: 1929.7MB/s 1935.6MB/s WRITE: 1926.8MB/s 1932.6MB/s jobs5 READ: 18823MB/s 19024MB/s READ: 18968MB/s 19071MB/s WRITE: 6191.6MB/s 6372.1MB/s WRITE: 5818.7MB/s 5787.1MB/s READ: 2011.7MB/s 1981.3MB/s WRITE: 2011.4MB/s 1980.1MB/s READ: 1949.3MB/s 1935.7MB/s WRITE: 1940.4MB/s 1926.1MB/s jobs6 READ: 21870MB/s 21715MB/s READ: 19957MB/s 19879MB/s WRITE: 6528.4MB/s 6537.6MB/s WRITE: 6098.9MB/s 6073.6MB/s READ: 2048.6MB/s 2049.9MB/s WRITE: 2041.7MB/s 2042.9MB/s READ: 2013.4MB/s 1990.4MB/s WRITE: 2009.4MB/s 1986.5MB/s jobs7 READ: 21359MB/s 21124MB/s READ: 19746MB/s 19293MB/s WRITE: 6660.4MB/s 6518.8MB/s WRITE: 6211.6MB/s 6193.1MB/s READ: 2089.7MB/s 2080.6MB/s WRITE: 2085.8MB/s 2076.5MB/s READ: 2041.2MB/s 2052.5MB/s WRITE: 2037.5MB/s 2048.8MB/s jobs8 READ: 20477MB/s 19974MB/s READ: 18922MB/s 18576MB/s WRITE: 6851.9MB/s 6788.3MB/s WRITE: 6407.7MB/s 6347.5MB/s READ: 2134.8MB/s 2136.1MB/s WRITE: 2132.8MB/s 2134.4MB/s READ: 2074.2MB/s 2069.6MB/s WRITE: 2087.3MB/s 2082.4MB/s jobs9 READ: 19797MB/s 19994MB/s READ: 18806MB/s 18581MB/s WRITE: 6878.7MB/s 6822.7MB/s WRITE: 6456.8MB/s 6447.2MB/s READ: 2141.1MB/s 2154.7MB/s WRITE: 2144.4MB/s 2157.3MB/s READ: 2084.1MB/s 2085.1MB/s WRITE: 2091.5MB/s 2092.5MB/s jobs10 READ: 19794MB/s 19784MB/s READ: 18794MB/s 18745MB/s WRITE: 6984.4MB/s 6676.3MB/s WRITE: 6532.3MB/s 6342.7MB/s READ: 2150.6MB/s 2155.4MB/s WRITE: 2156.8MB/s 2161.5MB/s READ: 2106.4MB/s 2095.6MB/s WRITE: 2109.7MB/s 2098.4MB/s BASE PATCHED jobs1 perfstat stalled-cycles-frontend 102,480,595,419 ( 41.53%) 114,508,864,804 ( 46.92%) stalled-cycles-backend 51,941,417,832 ( 21.05%) 46,836,112,388 ( 19.19%) instructions 283,612,054,215 ( 1.15) 283,918,134,959 ( 1.16) branches 56,372,560,385 ( 724.923) 56,449,814,753 ( 733.766) branch-misses 374,826,000 ( 0.66%) 326,935,859 ( 0.58%) jobs2 perfstat stalled-cycles-frontend 155,142,745,777 ( 40.99%) 164,170,979,198 ( 43.82%) stalled-cycles-backend 70,813,866,387 ( 18.71%) 66,456,858,165 ( 17.74%) instructions 463,436,648,173 ( 1.22) 464,221,890,191 ( 1.24) branches 91,088,733,902 ( 760.088) 91,278,144,546 ( 769.133) branch-misses 504,460,363 ( 0.55%) 394,033,842 ( 0.43%) jobs3 perfstat stalled-cycles-frontend 201,300,397,212 ( 39.84%) 223,969,902,257 ( 44.44%) stalled-cycles-backend 87,712,593,974 ( 17.36%) 81,618,888,712 ( 16.19%) instructions 642,869,545,023 ( 1.27) 644,677,354,132 ( 1.28) branches 125,724,560,594 ( 690.682) 126,133,159,521 ( 694.542) branch-misses 527,941,798 ( 0.42%) 444,782,220 ( 0.35%) jobs4 perfstat stalled-cycles-frontend 246,701,197,429 ( 38.12%) 280,076,030,886 ( 43.29%) stalled-cycles-backend 119,050,341,112 ( 18.40%) 110,955,641,671 ( 17.15%) instructions 822,716,962,127 ( 1.27) 825,536,969,320 ( 1.28) branches 160,590,028,545 ( 688.614) 161,152,996,915 ( 691.068) branch-misses 650,295,287 ( 0.40%) 550,229,113 ( 0.34%) jobs5 perfstat stalled-cycles-frontend 298,958,462,516 ( 38.30%) 344,852,200,358 ( 44.16%) stalled-cycles-backend 137,558,742,122 ( 17.62%) 129,465,067,102 ( 16.58%) instructions 1,005,714,688,752 ( 1.29) 1,007,657,999,432 ( 1.29) branches 195,988,773,962 ( 697.730) 196,446,873,984 ( 700.319) branch-misses 695,818,940 ( 0.36%) 624,823,263 ( 0.32%) jobs6 perfstat stalled-cycles-frontend 334,497,602,856 ( 36.71%) 387,590,419,779 ( 42.38%) stalled-cycles-backend 163,539,365,335 ( 17.95%) 152,640,193,639 ( 16.69%) instructions 1,184,738,177,851 ( 1.30) 1,187,396,281,677 ( 1.30) branches 230,592,915,640 ( 702.902) 231,253,802,882 ( 702.356) branch-misses 747,934,786 ( 0.32%) 643,902,424 ( 0.28%) jobs7 perfstat stalled-cycles-frontend 396,724,684,187 ( 37.71%) 460,705,858,952 ( 43.84%) stalled-cycles-backend 188,096,616,496 ( 17.88%) 175,785,787,036 ( 16.73%) instructions 1,364,041,136,608 ( 1.30) 1,366,689,075,112 ( 1.30) branches 265,253,096,936 ( 700.078) 265,890,524,883 ( 702.839) branch-misses 784,991,589 ( 0.30%) 729,196,689 ( 0.27%) jobs8 perfstat stalled-cycles-frontend 440,248,299,870 ( 36.92%) 509,554,793,816 ( 42.46%) stalled-cycles-backend 222,575,930,616 ( 18.67%) 213,401,248,432 ( 17.78%) instructions 1,542,262,045,114 ( 1.29) 1,545,233,932,257 ( 1.29) branches 299,775,178,439 ( 697.666) 300,528,458,505 ( 694.769) branch-misses 847,496,084 ( 0.28%) 748,794,308 ( 0.25%) jobs9 perfstat stalled-cycles-frontend 506,269,882,480 ( 37.86%) 592,798,032,820 ( 44.43%) stalled-cycles-backend 253,192,498,861 ( 18.93%) 233,727,666,185 ( 17.52%) instructions 1,721,985,080,913 ( 1.29) 1,724,666,236,005 ( 1.29) branches 334,517,360,255 ( 694.134) 335,199,758,164 ( 697.131) branch-misses 873,496,730 ( 0.26%) 815,379,236 ( 0.24%) jobs10 perfstat stalled-cycles-frontend 549,063,363,749 ( 37.18%) 651,302,376,662 ( 43.61%) stalled-cycles-backend 281,680,986,810 ( 19.07%) 277,005,235,582 ( 18.55%) instructions 1,901,859,271,180 ( 1.29) 1,906,311,064,230 ( 1.28) branches 369,398,536,153 ( 694.004) 370,527,696,358 ( 688.409) branch-misses 967,929,335 ( 0.26%) 890,125,056 ( 0.24%) BASE PATCHED seconds elapsed 79.421641008 78.735285546 seconds elapsed 61.471246133 60.869085949 seconds elapsed 62.317058173 62.224188495 seconds elapsed 60.030739363 60.081102518 seconds elapsed 74.070398362 74.317582865 seconds elapsed 84.985953007 85.414364176 seconds elapsed 97.724553255 98.173311344 seconds elapsed 109.488066758 110.268399318 seconds elapsed 122.768189405 122.967164498 seconds elapsed 135.130035105 136.934770801 On my other system (8 x86_64 CPUs, short version of test results): BASE PATCHED seconds elapsed 19.518065994 19.806320662 seconds elapsed 15.172772749 15.594718291 seconds elapsed 13.820925970 13.821708564 seconds elapsed 13.293097816 14.585206405 seconds elapsed 16.207284118 16.064431606 seconds elapsed 17.958376158 17.771825767 seconds elapsed 19.478009164 19.602961508 seconds elapsed 21.347152811 21.352318709 seconds elapsed 24.478121126 24.171088735 seconds elapsed 26.865057442 26.767327618 So performance-wise the numbers are quite similar. Also update zcomp interface to be more aligned with the crypto API. [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=144480832108927&w=2 [2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145379613507518&w=2 [3] https://github.com/sergey-senozhatsky/zram-perf-test Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160531122017.2878-3-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky Suggested-by: Minchan Kim Suggested-by: Joonsoo Kim Acked-by: Minchan Kim Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds