From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=202.108.3.11 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1792890712; b=ff1hpSBxXcA52TXPLZsdGqTvj0MMD6c6M02nal22TpkEHLgOaUFXH9+THHETlun3Gpeu zp18GBTb0Yho7Ojwpg7PiuKZpd4dOToV06T4xPEUx45ZzEkXXidWUUwdW5Z6LfJB8xweI gQmvcOPef5op6KIYconZFIheL4dQIRwB+aBYRbb/Ht9+UWd0oZ/7EK2kn+FP+7Uys6rIR z8+TV0oVUXyQgrR+fycx/aLhi4LI43NkEsHDOiNYXcxK5bJk6fisQlDjkGcwekLfzlkkx 8K0W7LxTWBBoogIu0D6kSvIpumUibaiKPrjtjkVfohbOAl5JNRZCPppw0YGefiwPcwA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1792890712; h=DMARC-Filter:DKIM-Signature:X-SMAIL-HELO:Received:X-Sender:X-Auth-ID: X-SMAIL-MID:X-SMAIL-UIID:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID: In-Reply-To:References:MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=Q8QjgI+cguG7bWbedFj22oT8cvaLq++BS/0yoHckLkk=; b=Chge+ZZEyEOxfYpih1TD04xPTMKgdQg4YKeeEBvlBZQt7AkrVhoxoZmtaebtVjNTfEt7 AtKxoHSY7AtaxnqWm0CokkyVi1jkZ8FRNJbnZAK4+t1tH3nurw1YgZCPVc0iNcjl9vJoq QUy+dCAzx6WV+B4jfOsLCjuiTOLNwx2xFgUikpFKvK5bhrHj/sxIIY18koF5t9kPcYIrE JhxmVvW6+jg5u352b9BX1TM/knHsanEYDR5mw3ycwlZRhV5TAJEpMDjwS7wxxSUSoG80s WqbNQDsRhkvtRH38tkry89RVE/Xh5uT7gS0ImDc1+FrwkS+63rUjCKPN7yanlNenCGA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=sina.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sina.com; dkim=pass header.d=sina.com header.i=@sina.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=201208 header.b=Dt9pEpyA; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=202.108.3.11 Received: from r3-11.sinamail.sina.com.cn (r3-11.sinamail.sina.com.cn [202.108.3.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53F8D606A31B for ; Sun, 25 Oct 2026 01:11:48 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org 53F8D606A31B Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sina.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sina.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=sina.com header.i=@sina.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=201208 header.b=Dt9pEpyA DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sina.com; s=201208; t=1792890709; bh=Q8QjgI+cguG7bWbedFj22oT8cvaLq++BS/0yoHckLkk=; h=From:Subject:Date:Message-ID; b=Dt9pEpyAAM/AH81vRp0/3ZKnWVUn99TIr/m2pJm41Yk7nJ4oNx7GjKJGBKTEMPntl q0L3UBYZ5WAULybxmpYuNBEEMcwyUe5xepUUkac73j0SxhX/u6c55VyMXtPolJlEGL xCS3gta6qCav1KnJ9r1vHlMYA6n5AJuJLrCDC+mo= X-SMAIL-HELO: localhost.localdomain Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain)([114.254.1.249]) by sina.com (10.54.253.34) with ESMTP id 6ADD574800005F4F; Sun, 25 Oct 2026 09:11:39 +0800 (CST) X-Sender: hdanton@sina.com X-Auth-ID: hdanton@sina.com Authentication-Results: sina.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=hdanton@sina.com; dkim=none header.i=none; dmarc=none action=none header.from=hdanton@sina.com X-SMAIL-MID: 4931906291679 X-SMAIL-UIID: 5492C95F558C4561AB8994FC81A21430-20261025-091139-1 From: Hillf Danton To: Sergey Senozhatsky Cc: Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>, Andrew Morton , Brian Geffon , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 09/13] zram: split zcomp into separate R/W streams Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2026 09:11:25 +0800 Message-ID: <20261025011126.1100-1-hdanton@sina.com> In-Reply-To: <20261024101401.1035-1-hdanton@sina.com> References: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Sat, 24 Oct 2026 18:14:00 +0800 Hillf Danton wrote: >On Sat, 24 Oct 2026 14:48:32 +0900 Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: >> On (26/10/23 19:40), Hillf Danton wrote: >> [..] >> > > writers vs readers 3 runs >> > > >> > > BASE+PE IOPS 1,271k avg 5.57us sd 1,393us p99.99 27.5us max 1,581,800us >> > > IOPS 1,461k avg 3.43us sd 78us p99.99 23.9us max 227,015us >> > > IOPS 1,444k avg 3.48us sd 222us p99.99 23.9us max 592,628us >> > > PATCHED+PE IOPS 1,457k avg 3.32us sd 18us p99.99 27.5us max 5,620us >> > > IOPS 1,464k avg 3.31us sd 17us p99.99 24.2us max 5,621us >> > > IOPS 1,475k avg 3.29us sd 16us p99.99 26.5us max 5,620us >> >> BASE+PE looked noisy, so I sat down and tested properly (also tested >> zstd and various compression levels). > > Lets see the data from another pov (feel free to disagree) -- in the android > phone/car cockpit environment, the render frequence is required above 60HZ, > IOW a frame rendered within 16ms, so what share of the 16ms does the IOPS > account for after this patchset, for example when an app in background is > brought foreground? > I mean cpu cycles are burned to reclaim pages, given zram and swapout/in, OTOH given whatever a GPU, slow or fast, if it would take more than 16ms to render a frame, then there is no cure for the dilemma.