Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-21110-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20231024142706.195517-1-hezhongkun.hzk@bytedance.com>
 <CAKEwX=OiNB+pPhb-3Tf7O=F7psKE3EOpwmbPSeLSOyuHpj3i+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACSyD1P6HmH9tSvONnNxYv8P+am_hH2dK3UJQd9_+o6EWkPsXA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKEwX=PC3C-PrWAH3XiYGyR4ujqBJQBBX6uRa2jXKCy9VMyRCQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACSyD1O7t0+BXUujJ81RAdEys3MUnmpu0sRADLazoyvayx5DLA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKEwX=P5AC+ubnunnZr5vMiC6fFU+E_E7jg_FZztWwZRYSxTWQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACSyD1Nnc_w3epbt6+EMt7a-4pAzgW1hbE=G5Fy5Tc5R5+uxKw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKEwX=NuXR9Ot1eRFsp9n-3Tq9yhjD9up+jyvXeOzQ4xK9kEPA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKEwX=Oj2dR6a4-DeccvcVdJ-J7b=83uCWQAf5u7U0sySudnkw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJD7tkb2oda=4f0s8w8xn+t_TM1b2Q_otbb86VPQ9R1m2uqDTA@mail.gmail.com> <CACSyD1ODCikYLDzO4LkQeDzB4sqDWCULwCdehw9inP-qyw3_Jg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACSyD1ODCikYLDzO4LkQeDzB4sqDWCULwCdehw9inP-qyw3_Jg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2024 08:29:24 -0800
Message-ID: <CAJD7tkY=zmGiPoWNjVaVeU+NPxV2t48J5-CxEP9=nBK8nAh0XA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH] mm: zswap: fix the lack of page lru flag
 in zswap_writeback_entry
To: Zhongkun He <hezhongkun.hzk@bytedance.com>
Cc: Nhat Pham <nphamcs@gmail.com>, akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, 
	sjenning@redhat.com, ddstreet@ieee.org, vitaly.wool@konsulko.com, 
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>, weijie.yang@samsung.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 7:13=E2=80=AFPM Zhongkun He <hezhongkun.hzk@bytedanc=
e.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Yosry, glad to hear from you and happy new year!
>
> > Sorry for being late to the party. It seems to me that all of this
> > hassle can be avoided if lru_add_fn() did the right thing in this case
> > and added the folio to the tail of the lru directly. I am no expert in
> > how the page flags work here, but it seems like we can do something
> > like this in lru_add_fn():
> >
> > if (folio_test_reclaim(folio))
> >     lruvec_add_folio_tail(lruvec, folio);
> > else
> >     lruvec_add_folio(lruvec, folio);
> >
> > I think the main problem with this is that PG_reclaim is an alias to
> > PG_readahead, so readahead pages will also go to the tail of the lru,
> > which is probably not good.
>
> Agree with you=EF=BC=8C I will try it.

+Matthew Wilcox

I think we need to figure out if it's okay to do this first, because
it will affect pages with PG_readahead as well.

>
> >
> > A more intrusive alternative is to introduce a folio_lru_add_tail()
> > variant that always adds pages to the tail, and optionally call that
> > from __read_swap_cache_async() instead of folio_lru_add() based on a
> > new boolean argument. The zswap code can set that boolean argument
> > during writeback to make sure newly allocated folios are always added
> > to the tail of the lru.
>
> I have the same idea and also find it intrusive. I think the first soluti=
on
> is very good and I will try it. If it works, I will send the next version=
.

One way to avoid introducing folio_lru_add_tail() and blumping a
boolean from zswap is to have a per-task context (similar to
memalloc_nofs_save()), that makes folio_add_lru() automatically add
folios to the tail of the LRU. I am not sure if this is an acceptable
approach though in terms of per-task flags and such.