summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/Documentation/lzo.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorDave Rodgman <dave.rodgman@arm.com>2019-03-07 19:30:40 -0500
committerLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2019-03-07 21:32:02 -0500
commit5ee4014af99f77dac89e01961b717d13ff1a8ea5 (patch)
tree33987106adbb2f59723c420154b83b94b122f90d /Documentation/lzo.txt
parent761b3238504858bbc630dc957eed1659dd7eaff1 (diff)
lib/lzo: implement run-length encoding
Patch series "lib/lzo: run-length encoding support", v5. Following on from the previous lzo-rle patchset: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/11/30/972 This patchset contains only the RLE patches, and should be applied on top of the non-RLE patches ( https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/2/5/366 ). Previously, some questions were raised around the RLE patches. I've done some additional benchmarking to answer these questions. In short: - RLE offers significant additional performance (data-dependent) - I didn't measure any regressions that were clearly outside the noise One concern with this patchset was around performance - specifically, measuring RLE impact separately from Matt Sealey's patches (CTZ & fast copy). I have done some additional benchmarking which I hope clarifies the benefits of each part of the patchset. Firstly, I've captured some memory via /dev/fmem from a Chromebook with many tabs open which is starting to swap, and then split this into 4178 4k pages. I've excluded the all-zero pages (as zram does), and also the no-zero pages (which won't tell us anything about RLE performance). This should give a realistic test dataset for zram. What I found was that the data is VERY bimodal: 44% of pages in this dataset contain 5% or fewer zeros, and 44% contain over 90% zeros (30% if you include the no-zero pages). This supports the idea of special-casing zeros in zram. Next, I've benchmarked four variants of lzo on these pages (on 64-bit Arm at max frequency): baseline LZO; baseline + Matt Sealey's patches (aka MS); baseline + RLE only; baseline + MS + RLE. Numbers are for weighted roundtrip throughput (the weighting reflects that zram does more compression than decompression). https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VLtLjRVxgUNuWFOxaGPwJYhl_hMQXpHe/view?usp=sharing Matt's patches help in all cases for Arm (and no effect on Intel), as expected. RLE also behaves as expected: with few zeros present, it makes no difference; above ~75%, it gives a good improvement (50 - 300 MB/s on top of the benefit from Matt's patches). Best performance is seen with both MS and RLE patches. Finally, I have benchmarked the same dataset on an x86-64 device. Here, the MS patches make no difference (as expected); RLE helps, similarly as on Arm. There were no definite regressions; allowing for observational error, 0.1% (3/4178) of cases had a regression > 1 standard deviation, of which the largest was 4.6% (1.2 standard deviations). I think this is probably within the noise. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xCUVwmiGD0heEMx5gcVEmLBI4eLaageV/view?usp=sharing One point to note is that the graphs show RLE appears to help very slightly with no zeros present! This is because the extra code causes the clang optimiser to change code layout in a way that happens to have a significant benefit. Taking baseline LZO and adding a do-nothing line like "__builtin_prefetch(out_len);" immediately before the "goto next" has the same effect. So this is a real, but basically spurious effect - it's small enough not to upset the overall findings. This patch (of 3): When using zram, we frequently encounter long runs of zero bytes. This adds a special case which identifies runs of zeros and encodes them using run-length encoding. This is faster for both compression and decompresion. For high-entropy data which doesn't hit this case, impact is minimal. Compression ratio is within a few percent in all cases. This modifies the bitstream in a way which is backwards compatible (i.e., we can decompress old bitstreams, but old versions of lzo cannot decompress new bitstreams). Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190205155944.16007-2-dave.rodgman@arm.com Signed-off-by: Dave Rodgman <dave.rodgman@arm.com> Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Cc: Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer <markus@oberhumer.com> Cc: Matt Sealey <matt.sealey@arm.com> Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> Cc: Nitin Gupta <nitingupta910@gmail.com> Cc: Richard Purdie <rpurdie@openedhand.com> Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> Cc: Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@google.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/lzo.txt')
-rw-r--r--Documentation/lzo.txt35
1 files changed, 28 insertions, 7 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/lzo.txt b/Documentation/lzo.txt
index 6fa6a93d0949..306c60344ca7 100644
--- a/Documentation/lzo.txt
+++ b/Documentation/lzo.txt
@@ -78,16 +78,30 @@ Description
78 is an implementation design choice independent on the algorithm or 78 is an implementation design choice independent on the algorithm or
79 encoding. 79 encoding.
80 80
81Versions
82
830: Original version
841: LZO-RLE
85
86Version 1 of LZO implements an extension to encode runs of zeros using run
87length encoding. This improves speed for data with many zeros, which is a
88common case for zram. This modifies the bitstream in a backwards compatible way
89(v1 can correctly decompress v0 compressed data, but v0 cannot read v1 data).
90
81Byte sequences 91Byte sequences
82============== 92==============
83 93
84 First byte encoding:: 94 First byte encoding::
85 95
86 0..17 : follow regular instruction encoding, see below. It is worth 96 0..16 : follow regular instruction encoding, see below. It is worth
87 noting that codes 16 and 17 will represent a block copy from 97 noting that code 16 will represent a block copy from the
88 the dictionary which is empty, and that they will always be 98 dictionary which is empty, and that it will always be
89 invalid at this place. 99 invalid at this place.
90 100
101 17 : bitstream version. If the first byte is 17, the next byte
102 gives the bitstream version. If the first byte is not 17,
103 the bitstream version is 0.
104
91 18..21 : copy 0..3 literals 105 18..21 : copy 0..3 literals
92 state = (byte - 17) = 0..3 [ copy <state> literals ] 106 state = (byte - 17) = 0..3 [ copy <state> literals ]
93 skip byte 107 skip byte
@@ -140,6 +154,11 @@ Byte sequences
140 state = S (copy S literals after this block) 154 state = S (copy S literals after this block)
141 End of stream is reached if distance == 16384 155 End of stream is reached if distance == 16384
142 156
157 In version 1, this instruction is also used to encode a run of zeros if
158 distance = 0xbfff, i.e. H = 1 and the D bits are all 1.
159 In this case, it is followed by a fourth byte, X.
160 run length = ((X << 3) | (0 0 0 0 0 L L L)) + 4.
161
143 0 0 1 L L L L L (32..63) 162 0 0 1 L L L L L (32..63)
144 Copy of small block within 16kB distance (preferably less than 34B) 163 Copy of small block within 16kB distance (preferably less than 34B)
145 length = 2 + (L ?: 31 + (zero_bytes * 255) + non_zero_byte) 164 length = 2 + (L ?: 31 + (zero_bytes * 255) + non_zero_byte)
@@ -165,7 +184,9 @@ Authors
165======= 184=======
166 185
167 This document was written by Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> on 2014/07/19 during an 186 This document was written by Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> on 2014/07/19 during an
168 analysis of the decompression code available in Linux 3.16-rc5. The code is 187 analysis of the decompression code available in Linux 3.16-rc5, and updated
169 tricky, it is possible that this document contains mistakes or that a few 188 by Dave Rodgman <dave.rodgman@arm.com> on 2018/10/30 to introduce run-length
170 corner cases were overlooked. In any case, please report any doubt, fix, or 189 encoding. The code is tricky, it is possible that this document contains
171 proposed updates to the author(s) so that the document can be updated. 190 mistakes or that a few corner cases were overlooked. In any case, please
191 report any doubt, fix, or proposed updates to the author(s) so that the
192 document can be updated.