Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: zswap: remove nr_zswap_stored atomic

[Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 2:09 PM Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 7:08 PM Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > zswap_nr_stored is used to maintain the number of stored pages in zswap
> > that are not same-filled pages. It is used in zswap_shrinker_count() to
> > scale the number of freeable compressed pages by the compression ratio.
> > That is, to reduce the amount of writeback from zswap with higher
> > compression ratios as the ROI from IO diminishes.
> >
> > However, the need for this counter is questionable due to two reasons:
> > - It is redundant. The value can be inferred from (zswap_stored_pages -
> >   zswap_same_filled_pages).

Ah, I forgot about this. For context, nr_stored was originally a
zswap_pool-specific stat, but I think Chengming has pulled it out and
converted it into a global pool stat in an earlier patch - yet,
globally, we already have zswap_stored_pages that is (mostly) the same
counter.

Might as well use existing counters (zswap_stored_pages) then, rather
than a newly introduced counter. Probably will shave off a couple
cycles here and there for the atomic increment/decrement :)

> > - When memcgs are enabled, we use memcg_page_state(memcg,
> >   MEMCG_ZSWAPPED), which includes same-filled pages anyway (i.e.
> >   equivalent to zswap_stored_pages).

This is fine I suppose. I was aware of this weird inaccuracy. However,
for the CONFIG_MEMCG case, it was kinda silly to introduce the counter
for per-cgroup same filled zswap pages, just for this one purpose, so
I decided to accept the inaccuracy.

> >
> > Use zswap_stored_pages instead in zswap_shrinker_count() to keep things
> > consistent whether memcgs are enabled or not, and add a comment about
> > the number of freeable pages possibly being scaled down more than it
> > should if we have lots of same-filled pages (i.e. inflated compression
> > ratio).
> >
> > Remove nr_zswap_stored and one atomic operation in the store and free
> > paths.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
>
> Any thoughts on this patch? Should I resend it separately?

Might be worth resending it separately, but up to you and Andrew!

Reviewed-by: Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>