On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 02:43:28PM +0800, Bob Liu wrote:
> Hi Seth,
>
> On 06/04/2013 04:33 AM, Seth Jennings wrote:
> > + /* Couldn't find unbuddied zbud page, create new one */
>
> How about moving zswap_is_full() to here.
>
> if (zswap_is_full()) {
> /* Don't alloc any new page, try to reclaim and direct use the
> reclaimed page instead */
Yes, this is at the top of the list for improvements.
I have already started on this work and it isn't quite as simple as it seems.
The difficulty rises from the fact that, for now, zswap uses per-cpu
compression buffers which require preemption to be disabled. This prevents the
calling zbud_reclaim_page() in zbud_alloc() because the eviction handler for
the user may do something that can wait; an allocation with GFP_WAIT for
example.
So it's going to take some massaging in the zswap layer to get that to work.
It's very doable. Just not in this patchset without causing a lot of code
thrash.
> }
>
> > + spin_unlock(&pool->lock);
> > + page = alloc_page(gfp);
> > + if (!page)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > + spin_lock(&pool->lock);
> > + pool->pages_nr++;
> > + zhdr = init_zbud_page(page);
> > + bud = FIRST;
<snip>
>
> It looks good for me except two things.
> One is about what the performance might be after the zswap pool is full.
> The other is still about the 20% limit of zswap pool size.
Yep, working on both of them.
Seth
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
