linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Domenico Cerasuolo <cerasuolodomenico@gmail.com>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sjenning@redhat.com,
	ddstreet@ieee.org, vitaly.wool@konsulko.com,
	yosryahmed@google.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, kernel-team@fb.com,
	Domenico Cerasuolo <cerasuolodomenico@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH v3] mm: zswap: shrink until can accept
Date: Fri, 26 May 2023 20:32:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230526183227.793977-1-cerasuolodomenico@gmail.com> (raw)

This update addresses an issue with the zswap reclaim mechanism, which
hinders the efficient offloading of cold pages to disk, thereby
compromising the preservation of the LRU order and consequently
diminishing, if not inverting, its performance benefits.

The functioning of the zswap shrink worker was found to be inadequate,
as shown by basic benchmark test. For the test, a kernel build was
utilized as a reference, with its memory confined to 1G via a cgroup and
a 5G swap file provided. The results are presented below, these are
averages of three runs without the use of zswap:

real 46m26s
user 35m4s
sys 7m37s

With zswap (zbud) enabled and max_pool_percent set to 1 (in a 32G
system), the results changed to:

real 56m4s
user 35m13s
sys 8m43s

written_back_pages: 18
reject_reclaim_fail: 0
pool_limit_hit:1478

Besides the evident regression, one thing to notice from this data is
the extremely low number of written_back_pages and pool_limit_hit.

The pool_limit_hit counter, which is increased in zswap_frontswap_store
when zswap is completely full, doesn't account for a particular
scenario: once zswap hits his limit, zswap_pool_reached_full is set to
true; with this flag on, zswap_frontswap_store rejects pages if zswap is
still above the acceptance threshold. Once we include the rejections due
to zswap_pool_reached_full && !zswap_can_accept(), the number goes from
1478 to a significant 21578266.

Zswap is stuck in an undesirable state where it rejects pages because
it's above the acceptance threshold, yet fails to attempt memory
reclaimation. This happens because the shrink work is only queued when
zswap_frontswap_store detects that it's full and the work itself only
reclaims one page per run.

This state results in hot pages getting written directly to disk,
while cold ones remain memory, waiting only to be invalidated. The LRU
order is completely broken and zswap ends up being just an overhead
without providing any benefits.

This commit applies 2 changes: a) the shrink worker is set to reclaim
pages until the acceptance threshold is met and b) the task is also
enqueued when zswap is not full but still above the threshold.

Testing this suggested update showed much better numbers:

real 36m37s
user 35m8s
sys 9m32s

written_back_pages: 10459423
reject_reclaim_fail: 12896
pool_limit_hit: 75653

V2:
- loop against == -EAGAIN rather than != -EINVAL and also break the loop
on MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES (thanks Yosry)
- cond_resched() to ensure that the loop doesn't burn the cpu (thanks
Vitaly)

V3:
- fix wrong loop break, should continue on !ret (thanks Johannes)

Fixes: 45190f01dd40 ("mm/zswap.c: add allocation hysteresis if pool limit is hit")
Signed-off-by: Domenico Cerasuolo <cerasuolodomenico@gmail.com>
---
 mm/zswap.c | 17 ++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/zswap.c b/mm/zswap.c
index 59da2a415fbb..bcb82e09eb64 100644
--- a/mm/zswap.c
+++ b/mm/zswap.c
@@ -37,6 +37,7 @@
 #include <linux/workqueue.h>
 
 #include "swap.h"
+#include "internal.h"
 
 /*********************************
 * statistics
@@ -587,9 +588,19 @@ static void shrink_worker(struct work_struct *w)
 {
 	struct zswap_pool *pool = container_of(w, typeof(*pool),
 						shrink_work);
+	int ret, failures = 0;
 
-	if (zpool_shrink(pool->zpool, 1, NULL))
-		zswap_reject_reclaim_fail++;
+	do {
+		ret = zpool_shrink(pool->zpool, 1, NULL);
+		if (ret) {
+			zswap_reject_reclaim_fail++;
+			if (ret != -EAGAIN)
+				break;
+			if (++failures == MAX_RECLAIM_RETRIES)
+				break;
+		}
+		cond_resched();
+	} while (!zswap_can_accept());
 	zswap_pool_put(pool);
 }
 
@@ -1188,7 +1199,7 @@ static int zswap_frontswap_store(unsigned type, pgoff_t offset,
 	if (zswap_pool_reached_full) {
 	       if (!zswap_can_accept()) {
 			ret = -ENOMEM;
-			goto reject;
+			goto shrink;
 		} else
 			zswap_pool_reached_full = false;
 	}
-- 
2.34.1



             reply	other threads:[~2023-05-26 18:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-26 18:32 Domenico Cerasuolo [this message]
2023-05-26 18:41 ` [PATCH v3] mm: zswap: shrink until can accept Johannes Weiner
2023-05-26 18:53 ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-05-26 19:14 ` Vitaly Wool

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20230526183227.793977-1-cerasuolodomenico@gmail.com \
    --to=cerasuolodomenico@gmail.com \
    --cc=ddstreet@ieee.org \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=sjenning@redhat.com \
    --cc=vitaly.wool@konsulko.com \
    --cc=yosryahmed@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).