* 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 --] ^ 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, other threads:[~2019-10-25 3:09 UTC | newest] 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
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).