From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>, Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>,
Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@google.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>,
Brain Geffon <bgeffon@google.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>, Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>,
Zhongkun He <hezhongkun.hzk@bytedance.com>,
Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huaweicloud.com>,
Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: swap: async free swap slot cache entries
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2023 13:13:35 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d171f8a4-47ed-0e29-877d-6824d593d7ed@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAF8kJuM59_12VNZ9d4oXZiLbAQC4LGLXODHqZw+7jiCJYva6YQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1851 bytes --]
On Sun, 24 Dec 2023, Chris Li wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 23, 2023 at 7:01 PM David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 23 Dec 2023, Chris Li wrote:
> >
> > > > How do you quantify the impact of the delayed swap_entry_free()?
> > > >
> > > > Since the free and memcg uncharge are now delayed, is there not the
> > > > possibility that we stay under memory pressure for longer? (Assuming at
> > > > least some users are swapping because of memory pressure.)
> > > >
> > > > I would assume that since the free and uncharge itself is delayed that in
> > > > the pathological case we'd actually be swapping *more* until the async
> > > > worker can run.
> > >
> > > Thanks for raising this interesting question.
> > >
> > > First of all, the swap_entry_free() does not impact "memory.current".
> > > It reduces "memory.swap.current". Technically it is the swap pressure
> > > not memory pressure that suffers the extra delay.
> > >
> > > Secondly, we are talking about delaying up to 64 swap entries for a
> > > few microseconds.
> >
> > What guarantees that the async freeing happens within a few microseconds?
>
> Linux kernel typically doesn't provide RT scheduling guarantees. You
> can change microseconds to milliseconds, my following reasoning still
> holds.
>
What guarantees that the async freeing happens even within 10s? Your
responses are implying that there is some deadline by which this freeing
absolutely must happen (us or ms), but I don't know of any strong
guarantees.
If there are no absolute guarantees about when the freeing may now occur,
I'm asking how the impact of the delayed swap_entry_free() can be
quantified.
The benefit to the current implementation is that there *are* strong
guarantees about when the freeing will occur and cannot grow exponentially
before the async worker can do the freeing.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-24 21:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-22 6:25 [PATCH] mm: swap: async free swap slot cache entries Chris Li
2023-12-22 19:52 ` Andrew Morton
2023-12-22 23:16 ` Chris Li
2023-12-23 6:11 ` David Rientjes
2023-12-23 16:51 ` Chris Li
2023-12-24 3:01 ` David Rientjes
2023-12-24 18:15 ` Chris Li
2023-12-24 21:13 ` David Rientjes [this message]
2023-12-24 22:06 ` Chris Li
2023-12-24 22:20 ` David Rientjes
2023-12-28 15:34 ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-12-25 7:07 ` Huang, Ying
2024-02-01 0:43 ` Chris Li
2023-12-23 1:44 ` Nhat Pham
2023-12-23 4:41 ` Chris Li
2023-12-28 15:33 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-02-01 0:57 ` Chris Li
2024-02-01 1:21 ` Yosry Ahmed
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=d171f8a4-47ed-0e29-877d-6824d593d7ed@google.com \
--to=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bgeffon@google.com \
--cc=chrisl@kernel.org \
--cc=ctshao@google.com \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hezhongkun.hzk@bytedance.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kasong@tencent.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=nphamcs@gmail.com \
--cc=shikemeng@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=v-songbaohua@oppo.com \
--cc=weixugc@google.com \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
--cc=yosryahmed@google.com \
--cc=yuzhao@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).