From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-171.mta1.migadu.com (out-171.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.171]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA99B27BF69 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2025 11:48:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.171 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745322490; cv=none; b=hYVX6NOCM0aC2+Hx1D2oDR2D8r07UIX9RRVvUisWrI01eJBpj1tZ4a8W/vJpZ1SOPTJIWlGJvFknL4z56xpopCFHTnWfcdaNctuPJWo2NJQO+mHvWgbPWyKTlGKGdrR3JuBv0Pdanc2/apz/Kx6Td/Pb2SFxocr74YC2LVO/+EI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745322490; c=relaxed/simple; bh=vvbSXOpv2PWldlCkgMw68EbwtInhF3Q/a+9cSwsTqWU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=cWtcEEYny2CkVIV3qQFO3Bk/cBiiBaXkU9XizF3QjgF92BzUfjX0wdemAedOQuMny4ZNjY7ViowS9noi8PbMFeuihUcOEM4DdOxcRldql1x6btK4h5sXvLBsQsv77+n9DcpNBLIr1w8+DugEShlbxt4rtMb1CCSWYXCM5GhNZZo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=F95sxA5l; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.171 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="F95sxA5l" Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 04:47:19 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1745322485; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=DlOy5pgOMDLNOF17VOxP0jw2ph04ic2bIH7kzzlbOHI=; b=F95sxA5lw7P8QmrrzD85lNvmnPmm9bJbaQFbZRyO8zsokGbePISBD4Zp2xa9m5HmyD4pZi 9InQKq9XKutv7roD05XGKcJvwpyyuBneY5YHZEVxT6DRVOviq6Q3intImd7OuS9jgn5B4l YARCPhgTzAhhOduK1xEbRW0uCv5FvYk= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Yosry Ahmed To: Nhat Pham Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, chengming.zhou@linux.dev, sj@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, kernel-team@meta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gourry@gourry.net, ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com, jonathan.cameron@huawei.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, minchan@kernel.org, senozhatsky@chromium.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] zsmalloc: prefer the the original page's node for compressed data Message-ID: References: <20250402204416.3435994-1-nphamcs@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250402204416.3435994-1-nphamcs@gmail.com> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 01:44:16PM -0700, Nhat Pham wrote: > Currently, zsmalloc, zswap's and zram's backend memory allocator, does > not enforce any policy for the allocation of memory for the compressed > data, instead just adopting the memory policy of the task entering > reclaim, or the default policy (prefer local node) if no such policy is > specified. This can lead to several pathological behaviors in > multi-node NUMA systems: > > 1. Systems with CXL-based memory tiering can encounter the following > inversion with zswap/zram: the coldest pages demoted to the CXL tier > can return to the high tier when they are reclaimed to compressed > swap, creating memory pressure on the high tier. > > 2. Consider a direct reclaimer scanning nodes in order of allocation > preference. If it ventures into remote nodes, the memory it > compresses there should stay there. Trying to shift those contents > over to the reclaiming thread's preferred node further *increases* > its local pressure, and provoking more spills. The remote node is > also the most likely to refault this data again. This undesirable > behavior was pointed out by Johannes Weiner in [1]. > > 3. For zswap writeback, the zswap entries are organized in > node-specific LRUs, based on the node placement of the original > pages, allowing for targeted zswap writeback for specific nodes. > > However, the compressed data of a zswap entry can be placed on a > different node from the LRU it is placed on. This means that reclaim > targeted at one node might not free up memory used for zswap entries > in that node, but instead reclaiming memory in a different node. > > All of these issues will be resolved if the compressed data go to the > same node as the original page. This patch encourages this behavior by > having zswap and zram pass the node of the original page to zsmalloc, > and have zsmalloc prefer the specified node if we need to allocate new > (zs)pages for the compressed data. > > Note that we are not strictly binding the allocation to the preferred > node. We still allow the allocation to fall back to other nodes when > the preferred node is full, or if we have zspages with slots available > on a different node. This is OK, and still a strict improvement over > the status quo: > > 1. On a system with demotion enabled, we will generally prefer > demotions over compressed swapping, and only swap when pages have > already gone to the lowest tier. This patch should achieve the > desired effect for the most part. > > 2. If the preferred node is out of memory, letting the compressed data > going to other nodes can be better than the alternative (OOMs, > keeping cold memory unreclaimed, disk swapping, etc.). > > 3. If the allocation go to a separate node because we have a zspage > with slots available, at least we're not creating extra immediate > memory pressure (since the space is already allocated). > > 3. While there can be mixings, we generally reclaim pages in > same-node batches, which encourage zspage grouping that is more > likely to go to the right node. > > 4. A strict binding would require partitioning zsmalloc by node, which > is more complicated, and more prone to regression, since it reduces > the storage density of zsmalloc. We need to evaluate the tradeoff > and benchmark carefully before adopting such an involved solution. > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20250331165306.GC2110528@cmpxchg.org/ > > Suggested-by: Gregory Price > Signed-off-by: Nhat Pham For the zswap/zsamlloc bits: Acked-by: Yosry Ahmed