From: Takero Funaki <flintglass@gmail.com>
To: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>,
Chengming Zhou <chengming.zhou@linux.dev>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: zswap: limit number of zpools based on CPU and RAM
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:00:43 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPpoddc5ge0myLfN8burL9fEUjc0oaB0C8Yc3_J923hd_O9u4A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJD7tkZ=o3AN+4Cj5UBJv6zcrjPFW5T1_53iHB2qtShRRhKhbQ@mail.gmail.com>
2024年6月7日(金) 2:46 Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>:
>
> There are a lot of magic numbers in this patch, and it seems like it's
> all based on theory. I don't object to making the number of zpools
> dynamic in some way, but unless we do it in a data-driven way where we
> understand the implications, I think the added complexity and
> inconsistency is not justified.
>
> For example, 2*CPU zpools is an overkill and will cause a lot of
> fragmentation. We use 32 zpools right now for machines with 100s of
> CPUs. I know that you are keeping 32 as the limit, but why 2*CPUs if
> nr_cpus <= 16?
>
> Also, the limitation based on memory size assumes that zsmalloc is the
> only allocator used by zswap, which is unfortunately not the case.
>
> The current implementation using 32 zpools all the time is not
> perfect, and I did write a patch to make it at least be min(nr_cpus,
> 32), but it is simple and it works. Complexity should be justified.
>
Thanks for your comments.
I agree the 2*cpu is too much. it was conservatively chosen assuming
1/2 contention while all cores are accessing zswap. Much smaller
factor or non-linear scale as your comments in the main thread would
be better.
I found your patch from the main thread.
One point I'm afraid, this hashing will fail if nr_zswap_zpools is 1
or is not rounded to order of 2. hash_ptr crashes when bit is 0.
> + return entry->pool->zpools[hash_ptr(entry, ilog2(nr_zswap_zpools))];
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-07 1:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-06 16:53 Takero Funaki
2024-06-06 17:45 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-06-07 1:00 ` Takero Funaki [this message]
2024-06-07 4:58 ` Yosry Ahmed
2024-06-07 5:49 ` Chengming Zhou
2024-06-07 9:26 ` Nhat Pham
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=CAPpoddc5ge0myLfN8burL9fEUjc0oaB0C8Yc3_J923hd_O9u4A@mail.gmail.com \
--to=flintglass@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chengming.zhou@linux.dev \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nphamcs@gmail.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