Re: [PATCH v4] mm: add zblock allocator

[Vitaly Wool]

> On Apr 18, 2025, at 12:52 PM, David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On 16.04.25 14:09, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 12, 2025 at 05:42:07PM +0200, Vitaly Wool wrote:
>>> zblock is a special purpose allocator for storing compressed pages.
>>> It stores integer number of same size objects per its block. These
>>> blocks consist of several physical pages (2**n, i. e. 1/2/4/8).
>>> 
>>> With zblock, it is possible to densely arrange objects of various sizes
>>> resulting in low internal fragmentation. Also this allocator tries to
>>> fill incomplete blocks instead of adding new ones, in many cases
>>> providing a compression ratio comparable to zmalloc's.
>>> 
>>> zblock is also in most cases superior to zsmalloc with regard to
>>> average performance and worst execution times, thus allowing for better
>>> response time and real-time characteristics of the whole system.
>> Is there a reason not to use this allocation scheme in zsmalloc then?
>> I'm curious what others think, but I'm still not convinced a second
>> allocator makes sense. It's maintenance overhead, a permanent struggle
>> to match feature parity, and it fragments development and testing base.
>> Not long ago several slab allocators were removed for those
>> reasons. Likewise, we just deleted zbud and z3fold because they didn't
>> get any attention and bitrotted, but not before years of inflicting
>> pain through the zpool interface, users accidentally making very
>> suboptimal choices, reporting the same bugs over and over again etc.
>> If you discovered a better allocation scheme, that's excellent. But I
>> don't see why it warrants forking the entire allocator.
> 
> Just curious, I see a review on v4 happening on something that was nacked by two people in v2 [1].
> 
> Do these nack's still apply or were something clarified and they no longer apply?

The reasons for both NAKs are no longer valid (since v3).

~Vitaly

> 
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/CAKEwX=Ma9phmURz5nyJm0MQrWmXGFLFBPwr8-Cx=zbc473rx9A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> 
> David / dhildenb
>