Linux-EROFS Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
* Re: [PATCH] squashfs: Migrate from ll_rw_block usage to BIO
       [not found] ` <20191025004531.89978-1-pliard@google.com>
@ 2019-10-25  2:53   ` Gao Xiang
  2019-10-25  3:02     ` Guenter Roeck via Linux-erofs
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Gao Xiang @ 2019-10-25  2:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Philippe Liard; +Cc: groeck, phillip, linux-erofs, linux-kernel

On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 09:45:31AM +0900, Philippe Liard wrote:
> > Personally speaking, just for Android related use cases, I'd suggest
> > latest EROFS if you care more about system overall performance more
> > than compression ratio, even https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/22/814 is
> > applied (you can do benchmark), we did much efforts 3 years ago.
> >
> > And that is not only performance but noticable memory overhead (a lot
> > of extra memory allocations) and heavy page cache thrashing in low
> > memory scenarios (it's very common [1].)
> 
> Thanks for the suggestion. EROFS is on our radar and we will
> (re)consider it once it goes out of staging. But we will most likely
> stay on squashfs until this happens.

EROFS is already out of staging in mainline right now,
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/erofs/

If you agree on that, I'd suggest you try it right now
since it's widely (200+ million devices on the market)
deployed for our Android smartphones and fully open source
and open community. I think this is not a regrettable
attempt and we can response any question.

https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191024033259.GA2513@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1

In my personal opinion, just for Android use cases,
I think it is worth taking some time.

Thanks,
Gao Xiang


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] squashfs: Migrate from ll_rw_block usage to BIO
  2019-10-25  2:53   ` [PATCH] squashfs: Migrate from ll_rw_block usage to BIO Gao Xiang
@ 2019-10-25  3:02     ` Guenter Roeck via Linux-erofs
  2019-10-25  3:12       ` Gao Xiang
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Guenter Roeck via Linux-erofs @ 2019-10-25  3:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Gao Xiang
  Cc: linux-kernel, Philippe Liard, Guenter Roeck, phillip, linux-erofs

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1697 bytes --]

On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 7:51 PM Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@huawei.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 09:45:31AM +0900, Philippe Liard wrote:
> > > Personally speaking, just for Android related use cases, I'd suggest
> > > latest EROFS if you care more about system overall performance more
> > > than compression ratio, even https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/22/814 is
> > > applied (you can do benchmark), we did much efforts 3 years ago.
> > >
> > > And that is not only performance but noticable memory overhead (a lot
> > > of extra memory allocations) and heavy page cache thrashing in low
> > > memory scenarios (it's very common [1].)
> >
> > Thanks for the suggestion. EROFS is on our radar and we will
> > (re)consider it once it goes out of staging. But we will most likely
> > stay on squashfs until this happens.
>
> EROFS is already out of staging in mainline right now,
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/erofs/
>
> If you agree on that, I'd suggest you try it right now
> since it's widely (200+ million devices on the market)
> deployed for our Android smartphones and fully open source
> and open community. I think this is not a regrettable
> attempt and we can response any question.
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191024033259.GA2513@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1
>
> In my personal opinion, just for Android use cases,
> I think it is worth taking some time.
>
> All well said. The question, though, is if that is a reason to reject
squashfs performance improvements. I argue that it is not. The decision to
switch to erofs or not is completely orthogonal to squashfs performance
improvements, and one doesn't preclude the other.

Guenter

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2505 bytes --]

<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 7:51 PM Gao Xiang &lt;<a href="mailto:gaoxiang25@huawei.com">gaoxiang25@huawei.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 09:45:31AM +0900, Philippe Liard wrote:<br>
&gt; &gt; Personally speaking, just for Android related use cases, I&#39;d suggest<br>
&gt; &gt; latest EROFS if you care more about system overall performance more<br>
&gt; &gt; than compression ratio, even <a href="https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/22/814" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/22/814</a> is<br>
&gt; &gt; applied (you can do benchmark), we did much efforts 3 years ago.<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; And that is not only performance but noticable memory overhead (a lot<br>
&gt; &gt; of extra memory allocations) and heavy page cache thrashing in low<br>
&gt; &gt; memory scenarios (it&#39;s very common [1].)<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; Thanks for the suggestion. EROFS is on our radar and we will<br>
&gt; (re)consider it once it goes out of staging. But we will most likely<br>
&gt; stay on squashfs until this happens.<br>
<br>
EROFS is already out of staging in mainline right now,<br>
<a href="https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/erofs/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/erofs/</a><br>
<br>
If you agree on that, I&#39;d suggest you try it right now<br>
since it&#39;s widely (200+ million devices on the market)<br>
deployed for our Android smartphones and fully open source<br>
and open community. I think this is not a regrettable<br>
attempt and we can response any question.<br>
<br>
<a href="https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191024033259.GA2513@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191024033259.GA2513@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1</a><br>
<br>
In my personal opinion, just for Android use cases,<br>
I think it is worth taking some time.<br>
<br></blockquote><div>All well said. The question, though, is if that is a reason to reject squashfs performance improvements. I argue that it is not. The decision to switch to erofs or not is completely orthogonal to squashfs performance improvements, and one doesn&#39;t preclude the other.</div><div><br></div><div>Guenter</div><div><br></div></div></div>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] squashfs: Migrate from ll_rw_block usage to BIO
  2019-10-25  3:02     ` Guenter Roeck via Linux-erofs
@ 2019-10-25  3:12       ` Gao Xiang
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Gao Xiang @ 2019-10-25  3:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Guenter Roeck
  Cc: linux-kernel, Philippe Liard, Guenter Roeck, phillip, linux-erofs

On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 08:02:14PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 7:51 PM Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 09:45:31AM +0900, Philippe Liard wrote:
> > > > Personally speaking, just for Android related use cases, I'd suggest
> > > > latest EROFS if you care more about system overall performance more
> > > > than compression ratio, even https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/22/814 is
> > > > applied (you can do benchmark), we did much efforts 3 years ago.
> > > >
> > > > And that is not only performance but noticable memory overhead (a lot
> > > > of extra memory allocations) and heavy page cache thrashing in low
> > > > memory scenarios (it's very common [1].)
> > >
> > > Thanks for the suggestion. EROFS is on our radar and we will
> > > (re)consider it once it goes out of staging. But we will most likely
> > > stay on squashfs until this happens.
> >
> > EROFS is already out of staging in mainline right now,
> >
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/fs/erofs/
> >
> > If you agree on that, I'd suggest you try it right now
> > since it's widely (200+ million devices on the market)
> > deployed for our Android smartphones and fully open source
> > and open community. I think this is not a regrettable
> > attempt and we can response any question.
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191024033259.GA2513@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1
> >
> > In my personal opinion, just for Android use cases,
> > I think it is worth taking some time.
> >
> > All well said. The question, though, is if that is a reason to reject
> squashfs performance improvements. I argue that it is not. The decision to
> switch to erofs or not is completely orthogonal to squashfs performance
> improvements, and one doesn't preclude the other.

Note that I have no objection on this patch. And I'm happy to see any
improvements for other compression filesystems. And we are keeping on
boosting up our overall performance as well but I think I can give
some personal suggestions on given specific scenario since we already
did other solutions before. Just FYI to you.

Thanks,
Gao Xiang

> 
> Guenter

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, back to index

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <20191018010846.186484-1-pliard@google.com>
     [not found] ` <20191025004531.89978-1-pliard@google.com>
2019-10-25  2:53   ` [PATCH] squashfs: Migrate from ll_rw_block usage to BIO Gao Xiang
2019-10-25  3:02     ` Guenter Roeck via Linux-erofs
2019-10-25  3:12       ` Gao Xiang

Linux-EROFS Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-erofs/0 linux-erofs/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-erofs linux-erofs/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-erofs \
		linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org linux-erofs@ozlabs.org
	public-inbox-index linux-erofs

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.ozlabs.lists.linux-erofs


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git