On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 7:51 PM Gao Xiang <[email protected]> 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
