Re: [PATCH 4/5] mm: zswap: add basic meminfo and vmstat coverage

Minchan Kim
2022-04-28T17:31:45Z

On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 01:23:21PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 09:59:53AM -0700, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 10:25:59AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 03:16:48PM -0700, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 05:20:29PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 01:29:34PM -0700, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Johannes,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 12:00:15PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > > > > > Currently it requires poking at debugfs to figure out the size and
> > > > > > > population of the zswap cache on a host. There are no counters for
> > > > > > > reads and writes against the cache. As a result, it's difficult to
> > > > > > > understand zswap behavior on production systems.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Print zswap memory consumption and how many pages are zswapped out in
> > > > > > > /proc/meminfo. Count zswapouts and zswapins in /proc/vmstat.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > fs/proc/meminfo.c | 7 +++++++
> > > > > > > include/linux/swap.h | 5 +++++
> > > > > > > include/linux/vm_event_item.h | 4 ++++
> > > > > > > mm/vmstat.c | 4 ++++
> > > > > > > mm/zswap.c | 13 ++++++-------
> > > > > > > 5 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/proc/meminfo.c b/fs/proc/meminfo.c
> > > > > > > index 6fa761c9cc78..6e89f0e2fd20 100644
> > > > > > > --- a/fs/proc/meminfo.c
> > > > > > > +++ b/fs/proc/meminfo.c
> > > > > > > @@ -86,6 +86,13 @@ static int meminfo_proc_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > show_val_kb(m, "SwapTotal: ", i.totalswap);
> > > > > > > show_val_kb(m, "SwapFree: ", i.freeswap);
> > > > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ZSWAP
> > > > > > > + seq_printf(m, "Zswap: %8lu kB\n",
> > > > > > > + (unsigned long)(zswap_pool_total_size >> 10));
> > > > > > > + seq_printf(m, "Zswapped: %8lu kB\n",
> > > > > > > + (unsigned long)atomic_read(&zswap_stored_pages) <<
> > > > > > > + (PAGE_SHIFT - 10));
> > > > > > > +#endif
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree it would be very handy to have the memory consumption in meminfo
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/YYwZXrL3Fu8%2FvLZw@google.com/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If we really go this Zswap only metric instead of general term
> > > > > > "Compressed", I'd like to post maybe "Zram:" with same reason
> > > > > > in this patchset. Do you think that's better idea instead of
> > > > > > introducing general term like "Compressed:" or something else?
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm fine with changing it to Compressed. If somebody cares about a
> > > > > more detailed breakdown, we can add Zswap, Zram subsets as needed.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks! Please consider ZSWPIN to rename more general term, too.
> > >
> > > That doesn't make sense to me.
> > >
> > > Zram is a swap backend, its traffic is accounted in PSWPIN/OUT. Zswap
> > > is a writeback cache on top of the swap backend. It has pages
> > > entering, refaulting, and being written back to the swap backend
> > > (PSWPOUT). A zswpout and a zramout are different things.
> >
> > Think about that system has two swap devices (storage + zram).
> > I think it's useful to know how many swap IO comes from zram
> > and rest of them are storage.
>
> Hm, isn't this comparable to having one swap on flash and one swap on
> a rotating disk? /sys/block/*/stat should be able to tell you how
> traffic is distributed, no?

That raises me a same question. Could you also look at the zswap stat
instead of adding it into vmstat? (If zswap doesn't have the counter,
couldn't we simply add new stat in sysfs?)

I thought the patch aims for exposting statistics to grab easier
using popular meminfo and vmstat and wanted to leverage it for
zram, too.

>
> What I'm more worried about is the fact that in theory you can stack
> zswap on top of zram. Consider a fast compression cache on top of a
> higher compression backend. Is somebody doing this now? I doubt
> it. But as people look into memory tiering more and more, this doesn't
> sound entirely implausible. If the stacked layers then share the same
> in/out events, it would be quite confusing.
>
> If you think PSWPIN/OUT and per-device stats aren't enough, I'm not
> opposed to adding zramin/out to /proc/vmstat as well. I think we're
> less worried there than with /proc/meminfo. I'd just prefer to keep
> them separate from the zswap events.
>
> Does that sound reasonable?
>