Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210630184624.9ca1937310b0dd5ce66b30e7@linux-foundation.org>
 <20210701015258.BrxjIzdE1%akpm@linux-foundation.org> <YN3Xbdc9N81PIegK@google.com>
 <CAGWkznHWe22iwtBNtJfY75aS5_cfwKTaBfkX=zzmSaTwHZaAyQ@mail.gmail.com> <YN6ogJbnI46hnjgk@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <YN6ogJbnI46hnjgk@google.com>
From:   Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 2 Jul 2021 14:20:42 +0800
Message-ID: <CAGWkznGaQyfxUuP8OJxvLapk4R8x3kpgU50H-xZfTiLO-i9WMg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 108/192] mm: zram: amend SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT on zspage_cachep
To:     Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        mm-commits@vger.kernel.org,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
        torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 1:47 PM Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 10:45:09AM +0800, Zhaoyang Huang wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 10:56 PM Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 06:52:58PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > From: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>
> > > > Subject: mm: zram: amend SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT on zspage_cachep
> > > >
> > > > Zspage_cachep is found be merged with other kmem cache during test, which
> > > > is not good for debug things (zs_pool->zspage_cachep present to be another
> > > > kmem cache in memory dumpfile).  It is also neccessary to do so as
> > > > shrinker has been registered for zspage.
> > > >
> > > > Amending this flag can help kernel to calculate SLAB_RECLAIMBLE correctly.
> > > >
> > > > Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1623137297-29685-1-git-send-email-huangzhaoyang@gmail.com
> > > > Signed-off-by: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>
> > > > Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
> > > > Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > >
> > > Sorry for the late. I don't think this is correct.
> > >
> > > It's true "struct zspage" can be freed by zsmalloc's compaction registerred
> > > by slab shrinker so tempted to make it SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT. However, it's
> > > quite limited to work only when objects in the zspage are heavily fragmented.
> > > Once the compaction is done, zspage are never discardable until objects are
> > > fragmented again. It means it could hurt other reclaimable slab page reclaiming
> > > since the zspage slab object pins the page.
> > IMHO, kmem cache's reclaiming is NOT affected by SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT
> > . This flag just affects kmem cache merge[1], the slab page's migrate
> > type[2] and the page's statistics. Actually, zspage's cache DO merged
> > with others even without SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT currently, which maybe
> > cause zspage's object will NEVER be discarded.(SLAB_MERGE_SAME
> > introduce confusions as people believe the cache will merge with
> > others when it set and vice versa)
> >
> > [1]
> >  struct kmem_cache *find_mergeable(size_t size, size_t align, unsigned
> > long flags, const char *name, void (*ctor)(void *))
> > ...
> >     if ((flags & SLAB_MERGE_SAME) != (s->flags & SLAB_MERGE_SAME))
> >      continue;
> >
> > [2]
> > if (s->flags & SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT)
> >     s->allocflags |= __GFP_RECLAIMABLE;
>
> That's the point here. With SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT, page allocator
> try to allocate pages from MIGRATE_RECLAIMABLE with belief those
> objects are easily reclaimable. Say a page has object A, B, C, D
> and E. A-D are easily reclaimable but E is hard. What happens is
> VM couldn't reclaim the page in the end due to E even though it
> already reclaimed A-D. And the such fragmenation could be spread
> out entire MIGRATE_RECLAIMABLE pageblocks over time.
> That's why I'd like to put zspage into MIGRATE_UNMOVALBE from the
> beginning since I don't think it's easily reclaimble once compaction
> is done.
The slab page could fallback to any migrate type even allocating with
__GFP_RECLAIMABLE, and there is only one page per slab within zspage's
cache, which will not be affected by compaction, so I think that
doesn't make sense.