From: Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>
To: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com>
Cc: Vitaly Wool <vitaly.wool@konsulko.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@redhat.com>,
Dan Streetman <ddstreet@ieee.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] mm/zswap: optimize the scalability of zswap rb-tree
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2023 12:08:17 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKEwX=OqMK881u3kPB99KX_9UWreddz-cUT5ArzdwpHwQjQ6yA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231206-zswap-lock-optimize-v1-0-e25b059f9c3a@bytedance.com>
On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 1:46 AM Chengming Zhou
<zhouchengming@bytedance.com> wrote:
> When testing the zswap performance by using kernel build -j32 in a tmpfs
> directory, I found the scalability of zswap rb-tree is not good, which
> is protected by the only spinlock. That would cause heavy lock contention
> if multiple tasks zswap_store/load concurrently.
>
> So a simple solution is to split the only one zswap rb-tree into multiple
> rb-trees, each corresponds to SWAP_ADDRESS_SPACE_PAGES (64M). This idea is
> from the commit 4b3ef9daa4fc ("mm/swap: split swap cache into 64MB trunks").
>
> Although this method can't solve the spinlock contention completely, it
> can mitigate much of that contention.
By how much? Do you have any stats to estimate the amount of
contention and the reduction by this patch?
I do think lock contention could be a problem here, and it will be
even worse with the zswap shrinker enabled (which introduces an
theoretically unbounded number of concurrent reclaimers hammering on
the zswap rbtree and its lock). I am generally a bit weary about
architectural change though, especially if it is just a bandaid. We
have tried to reduce the lock contention somewhere else (multiple
zpools), and as predicted it just shifts the contention point
elsewhere. Maybe we need a deeper architectural re-think.
Not an outright NACK of course - just food for thought.
>
> Another problem when testing the zswap using our default zsmalloc is that
> zswap_load() and zswap_writeback_entry() have to malloc a temporary memory
> to support !zpool_can_sleep_mapped().
>
> Optimize it by reusing the percpu crypto_acomp_ctx->dstmem, which is also
> used by zswap_store() and protected by the same percpu crypto_acomp_ctx->mutex.
It'd be nice to reduce the (temporary) memory allocation on these
paths, but would this introduce contention on the per-cpu dstmem and
the mutex that protects it, if there are too many concurrent
store/load/writeback requests?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-06 20:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-06 9:46 Chengming Zhou
2023-12-06 9:46 ` [PATCH 1/7] mm/zswap: make sure each swapfile always have " Chengming Zhou
2023-12-08 15:17 ` kernel test robot
2023-12-08 15:45 ` Chengming Zhou
2023-12-08 16:45 ` kernel test robot
2023-12-06 9:46 ` [PATCH 2/7] mm/zswap: split " Chengming Zhou
2023-12-06 9:46 ` [PATCH 3/7] mm/zswap: reuse dstmem when decompress Chengming Zhou
2023-12-12 22:58 ` Nhat Pham
2023-12-13 2:41 ` Chengming Zhou
2023-12-06 9:46 ` [PATCH 4/7] mm/zswap: change dstmem size to one page Chengming Zhou
2023-12-06 17:12 ` Nhat Pham
2023-12-07 2:59 ` Chengming Zhou
2023-12-06 9:46 ` [PATCH 5/7] mm/zswap: refactor out __zswap_load() Chengming Zhou
2023-12-12 23:13 ` Nhat Pham
2023-12-13 2:46 ` Chengming Zhou
2023-12-06 9:46 ` [PATCH 6/7] mm/zswap: cleanup zswap_load() Chengming Zhou
2023-12-06 9:46 ` [PATCH 7/7] mm/zswap: cleanup zswap_reclaim_entry() Chengming Zhou
2023-12-06 17:24 ` [PATCH 0/7] mm/zswap: optimize the scalability of zswap rb-tree Nhat Pham
2023-12-06 20:41 ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-12-07 0:43 ` Chris Li
2023-12-07 3:25 ` Chengming Zhou
2023-12-12 23:26 ` Yosry Ahmed
2023-12-12 23:33 ` Nhat Pham
2023-12-13 2:57 ` Chengming Zhou
2023-12-06 20:08 ` Nhat Pham [this message]
2023-12-07 3:13 ` Chengming Zhou
2023-12-07 15:18 ` Chengming Zhou
2023-12-07 18:15 ` Nhat Pham
2023-12-07 18:57 ` Nhat Pham
2023-12-08 15:41 ` Chengming Zhou
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='CAKEwX=OqMK881u3kPB99KX_9UWreddz-cUT5ArzdwpHwQjQ6yA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=nphamcs@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ddstreet@ieee.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=sjenning@redhat.com \
--cc=vitaly.wool@konsulko.com \
--cc=yosryahmed@google.com \
--cc=zhouchengming@bytedance.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