Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-10629-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2023 19:01:14 -0800 (PST)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
    linux-mm@kvack.org, Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>, 
    Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>, Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>, 
    Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@google.com>, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>, 
    Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>, Brain Geffon <bgeffon@google.com>, 
    Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, 
    Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>, 
    Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>, Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>, 
    Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>, 
    Zhongkun He <hezhongkun.hzk@bytedance.com>, 
    Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@huaweicloud.com>, Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>, 
    Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: swap: async free swap slot cache entries
In-Reply-To: <CAF8kJuOafpWhKSR96Lsdig_HqtLA79eeHUx9MxBzFGi95XyzuA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0a052cb1-a5c5-4bee-5bd5-fd5569765012@google.com>
References: <20231221-async-free-v1-1-94b277992cb0@kernel.org> <20231222115208.ab4d2aeacdafa4158b14e532@linux-foundation.org> <ZYYY1VBKdLHH-Kl3@google.com> <f6bf2c8d-c37a-dab7-8ef8-38a35240edb6@google.com>
 <CAF8kJuOafpWhKSR96Lsdig_HqtLA79eeHUx9MxBzFGi95XyzuA@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

On Sat, 23 Dec 2023, Chris Li wrote:

> > How do you quantify the impact of the delayed swap_entry_free()?
> >
> > Since the free and memcg uncharge are now delayed, is there not the
> > possibility that we stay under memory pressure for longer?  (Assuming at
> > least some users are swapping because of memory pressure.)
> >
> > I would assume that since the free and uncharge itself is delayed that in
> > the pathological case we'd actually be swapping *more* until the async
> > worker can run.
> 
> Thanks for raising this interesting question.
> 
> First of all, the swap_entry_free() does not impact "memory.current".
> It reduces "memory.swap.current". Technically it is the swap pressure
> not memory pressure that suffers the extra delay.
> 
> Secondly, we are talking about delaying up to 64 swap entries for a
> few microseconds.

What guarantees that the async freeing happens within a few microseconds?

> Where the swap slot cache itself delays the freeing
> of the entries for an arbitrary amount of time. It is not freed until
> the cache is full of 64 entries. This delay can be seconds or even
> minutes. Adding a few microseconds of  extra delay to existing seconds
> delay really makes no difference from the swap pressure point of view.
> 
> Chris
>