On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 06:58:59PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote: > On 2019/7/22 ????6:18, David Sterba wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 10:50:42AM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote: > >> +choice > >> + prompt "EROFS Data Decompression mode" > >> + depends on EROFS_FS_ZIP > >> + default EROFS_FS_ZIP_CACHE_READAROUND > >> + help > >> + EROFS supports three options for decompression. > >> + "In-place I/O Only" consumes the minimum memory > >> + with lowest random read. > >> + > >> + "Cached Decompression for readaround" consumes > >> + the maximum memory with highest random read. > >> + > >> + If unsure, select "Cached Decompression for readaround" > >> + > >> +config EROFS_FS_ZIP_CACHE_DISABLED > >> + bool "In-place I/O Only" > >> + help > >> + Read compressed data into page cache and do in-place > >> + I/O decompression directly. > >> + > >> +config EROFS_FS_ZIP_CACHE_READAHEAD > >> + bool "Cached Decompression for readahead" > >> + help > >> + For each request, it caches the last compressed page > >> + for further reading. > >> + It still does in-place I/O for the rest compressed pages. > >> + > >> +config EROFS_FS_ZIP_CACHE_READAROUND > >> + bool "Cached Decompression for readaround" > >> + help > >> + For each request, it caches the both end compressed pages > >> + for further reading. > >> + It still does in-place I/O for the rest compressed pages. > >> + > >> + Recommended for performance priority. > > > > The number of individual Kconfig options is quite high, are you sure you > > need them to be split like that? > > You mean the above? these are 3 cache strategies, which impact the > runtime memory consumption and performance. I tend to leave the above > as it-is... No, I mean all Kconfig options, they're scattered over several patches, best seen in the checked out branch. The cache strategies are actually just one config option (choice). > I'm not sure vm_map_ram() is always better than vmap() for all > platforms (it has noticeable performance impact). However that > seems true for my test machines (x86-64, arm64). > > If vm_map_ram() is always the optimal choice compared with vmap(), > I will remove vmap() entirely, that is OK. But I am not sure for > every platforms though. You can select the implementation by platform, I don't know what are the criteria like cpu type etc, but I expect it's something that can be determined at module load time. Eventually a module parameter can be the the way to set it. > > And so on. I'd suggest to go through all the options and reconsider them > > to be built-in, or runtime settings. Debugging features like the fault > > injections could be useful on non-debugging builds too, so a separate > > option is fine, otherwise grouping other debugging options under the > > main EROFS_FS_DEBUG would look more logical. > > The remaining one is EROFS_FS_CLUSTER_PAGE_LIMIT. It impacts the total > size of z_erofs_pcluster structure. It's a hard limit, and should be > configured as small as possible. I can remove it right now since multi-block > compression is not available now. However, it will be added again after > multi-block compression is supported. > > So, How about leave it right now and use the default value? >From the Kconfig and build-time settings perspective I think it's misplaced. This affects testing, you'd have to rebuild and reinstall the module to test any change, while it's "just" a number that can be either module parameter, sysfs knob, mount option or special ioctl. But I may be wrong, EROFS is a special purpose filesystem, so the fine-grained build options might make sense (eg. due to smaller code). The question should be how does each option affect typical production build targets. Fewer is IMHO better. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
