Date:	Tue, 14 Jan 2014 09:11:15 +0900
From:	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
To:	Dan Streetman <ddstreet@...e.org>
Cc:	Seth Jennings <sjennings@...iantweb.net>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Bob Liu <bob.liu@...cle.com>,
	Weijie Yang <weijie.yang@...sung.com>,
	Shirish Pargaonkar <spargaonkar@...e.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/zswap: add writethrough option

Hello Dan,

Sorry for the late response and I didn't look at the code yet
because I am not convinced. :( 

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 08:23:27AM -0500, Dan Streetman wrote:
> Currently, zswap is writeback cache; stored pages are not sent
> to swap disk, and when zswap wants to evict old pages it must
> first write them back to swap cache/disk manually.  This avoids
> swap out disk I/O up front, but only moves that disk I/O to
> the writeback case (for pages that are evicted), and adds the
> overhead of having to uncompress the evicted pages and the
> need for an additional free page (to store the uncompressed page).
> 
> This optionally changes zswap to writethrough cache by enabling
> frontswap_writethrough() before registering, so that any
> successful page store will also be written to swap disk.  The
> default remains writeback.  To enable writethrough, the param
> zswap.writethrough=1 must be used at boot.
> 
> Whether writeback or writethrough will provide better performance
> depends on many factors including disk I/O speed/throughput,
> CPU speed(s), system load, etc.  In most cases it is likely
> that writeback has better performance than writethrough before
> zswap is full, but after zswap fills up writethrough has
> better performance than writeback.

So you claims we should use writeback default but writethrough
after memory limit is full?
But it would break LRU ordering and I think better idea is to
handle it more generic way rather than chaning entire policy.

Now, zswap evict out just *a* page rather than a bunch of pages
so it stucks every store if many swap write happens continuously.
It's not efficient so how about adding kswapd's threshold concept
like min/low/high? So, it could evict early before reaching zswap
memory pool and stop it reaches high watermark.
I guess it could be better than now.

Other point: As I read device-mapper/cache.txt, cache operating mode
already supports writethrough. It means zram zRAM can support
writeback/writethough with dm-cache.
Have you tried it? Is there any problem?

Acutally, I really don't know how much benefit we have that in-memory
swap overcomming to the real storage but if you want, zRAM with dm-cache
is another option rather than invent new wheel by "just having is better".

Thanks.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Dan Streetman <ddstreet@...e.org>
> 
> ---
> 
> Based on specjbb testing on my laptop, the results for both writeback
> and writethrough are better than not using zswap at all, but writeback
> does seem to be better than writethrough while zswap isn't full.  Once
> it fills up, performance for writethrough is essentially close to not
> using zswap, while writeback seems to be worse than not using zswap.
> However, I think more testing on a wider span of systems and conditions
> is needed.  Additionally, I'm not sure that specjbb is measuring true
> performance under fully loaded cpu conditions, so additional cpu load
> might need to be added or specjbb parameters modified (I took the
> values from the 4 "warehouses" test run).
> 
> In any case though, I think having writethrough as an option is still
> useful.  More changes could be made, such as changing from writeback
> to writethrough based on the zswap % full.  And the patch doesn't
> change default behavior - writethrough must be specifically enabled.
> 
> The %-ized numbers I got from specjbb on average, using the default
> 20% max_pool_percent and varying the amount of heap used as shown:
> 
> ram | no zswap | writeback | writethrough
> 75     93.08     100         96.90
> 87     96.58     95.58       96.72
> 100    92.29     89.73       86.75
> 112    63.80     38.66       19.66
> 125    4.79      29.90       15.75
> 137    4.99      4.50        4.75
> 150    4.28      4.62        5.01
> 162    5.20      2.94        4.66
> 175    5.71      2.11        4.84
> 
> 
> 
>  mm/zswap.c | 68 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/zswap.c b/mm/zswap.c
> index e55bab9..2f919db 100644
> --- a/mm/zswap.c
> +++ b/mm/zswap.c
> @@ -61,6 +61,8 @@ static atomic_t zswap_stored_pages = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
>  static u64 zswap_pool_limit_hit;
>  /* Pages written back when pool limit was reached */
>  static u64 zswap_written_back_pages;
> +/* Pages evicted when pool limit was reached */
> +static u64 zswap_evicted_pages;
>  /* Store failed due to a reclaim failure after pool limit was reached */
>  static u64 zswap_reject_reclaim_fail;
>  /* Compressed page was too big for the allocator to (optimally) store */
> @@ -89,6 +91,10 @@ static unsigned int zswap_max_pool_percent = 20;
>  module_param_named(max_pool_percent,
>  			zswap_max_pool_percent, uint, 0644);
>  
> +/* Writeback/writethrough mode (fixed at boot for now) */
> +static bool zswap_writethrough;
> +module_param_named(writethrough, zswap_writethrough, bool, 0444);
> +
>  /*********************************
>  * compression functions
>  **********************************/
> @@ -629,6 +635,48 @@ end:
>  }
>  
>  /*********************************
> +* evict code
> +**********************************/
> +
> +/*
> + * This evicts pages that have already been written through to swap.
> + */
> +static int zswap_evict_entry(struct zbud_pool *pool, unsigned long handle)
> +{
> +	struct zswap_header *zhdr;
> +	swp_entry_t swpentry;
> +	struct zswap_tree *tree;
> +	pgoff_t offset;
> +	struct zswap_entry *entry;
> +
> +	/* extract swpentry from data */
> +	zhdr = zbud_map(pool, handle);
> +	swpentry = zhdr->swpentry; /* here */
> +	zbud_unmap(pool, handle);
> +	tree = zswap_trees[swp_type(swpentry)];
> +	offset = swp_offset(swpentry);
> +	BUG_ON(pool != tree->pool);
> +
> +	/* find and ref zswap entry */
> +	spin_lock(&tree->lock);
> +	entry = zswap_rb_search(&tree->rbroot, offset);
> +	if (!entry) {
> +		/* entry was invalidated */
> +		spin_unlock(&tree->lock);
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	zswap_evicted_pages++;
> +
> +	zswap_rb_erase(&tree->rbroot, entry);
> +	zswap_entry_put(tree, entry);
> +
> +	spin_unlock(&tree->lock);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/*********************************
>  * frontswap hooks
>  **********************************/
>  /* attempts to compress and store an single page */
> @@ -744,7 +792,7 @@ static int zswap_frontswap_load(unsigned type, pgoff_t offset,
>  	spin_lock(&tree->lock);
>  	entry = zswap_entry_find_get(&tree->rbroot, offset);
>  	if (!entry) {
> -		/* entry was written back */
> +		/* entry was written back or evicted */
>  		spin_unlock(&tree->lock);
>  		return -1;
>  	}
> @@ -778,7 +826,7 @@ static void zswap_frontswap_invalidate_page(unsigned type, pgoff_t offset)
>  	spin_lock(&tree->lock);
>  	entry = zswap_rb_search(&tree->rbroot, offset);
>  	if (!entry) {
> -		/* entry was written back */
> +		/* entry was written back or evicted */
>  		spin_unlock(&tree->lock);
>  		return;
>  	}
> @@ -813,18 +861,26 @@ static void zswap_frontswap_invalidate_area(unsigned type)
>  	zswap_trees[type] = NULL;
>  }
>  
> -static struct zbud_ops zswap_zbud_ops = {
> +static struct zbud_ops zswap_zbud_writeback_ops = {
>  	.evict = zswap_writeback_entry
>  };
> +static struct zbud_ops zswap_zbud_writethrough_ops = {
> +	.evict = zswap_evict_entry
> +};
>  
>  static void zswap_frontswap_init(unsigned type)
>  {
>  	struct zswap_tree *tree;
> +	struct zbud_ops *ops;
>  
>  	tree = kzalloc(sizeof(struct zswap_tree), GFP_KERNEL);
>  	if (!tree)
>  		goto err;
> -	tree->pool = zbud_create_pool(GFP_KERNEL, &zswap_zbud_ops);
> +	if (zswap_writethrough)
> +		ops = &zswap_zbud_writethrough_ops;
> +	else
> +		ops = &zswap_zbud_writeback_ops;
> +	tree->pool = zbud_create_pool(GFP_KERNEL, ops);
>  	if (!tree->pool)
>  		goto freetree;
>  	tree->rbroot = RB_ROOT;
> @@ -875,6 +931,8 @@ static int __init zswap_debugfs_init(void)
>  			zswap_debugfs_root, &zswap_reject_compress_poor);
>  	debugfs_create_u64("written_back_pages", S_IRUGO,
>  			zswap_debugfs_root, &zswap_written_back_pages);
> +	debugfs_create_u64("evicted_pages", S_IRUGO,
> +			zswap_debugfs_root, &zswap_evicted_pages);
>  	debugfs_create_u64("duplicate_entry", S_IRUGO,
>  			zswap_debugfs_root, &zswap_duplicate_entry);
>  	debugfs_create_u64("pool_pages", S_IRUGO,
> @@ -919,6 +977,8 @@ static int __init init_zswap(void)
>  		pr_err("per-cpu initialization failed\n");
>  		goto pcpufail;
>  	}
> +	if (zswap_writethrough)
> +		frontswap_writethrough(true);
>  	frontswap_register_ops(&zswap_frontswap_ops);
>  	if (zswap_debugfs_init())
>  		pr_warn("debugfs initialization failed\n");
> -- 
> 1.8.3.1
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@...ck.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@...ck.org"> email@...ck.org </a>

-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists