lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Sep]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 0/5] mm: migrate zbud pages


On 09/28/2013 06:00 AM, Seth Jennings wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 12:16:37PM +0200, Tomasz Stanislawski wrote:
>> On 09/25/2013 11:57 PM, Seth Jennings wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 07:09:50PM +0200, Tomasz Stanislawski wrote:
>>>>> I just had an idea this afternoon to potentially kill both these birds with one
>>>>> stone: Replace the rbtree in zswap with an address_space.
>>>>>
>>>>> Each swap type would have its own page_tree to organize the compressed objects
>>>>> by type and offset (radix tree is more suited for this anyway) and a_ops that
>>>>> could be called by shrink_page_list() (writepage) or the migration code
>>>>> (migratepage).
>>>>>
>>>>> Then zbud pages could be put on the normal LRU list, maybe at the beginning of
>>>>> the inactive LRU so they would live for another cycle through the list, then be
>>>>> reclaimed in the normal way with the mapping->a_ops->writepage() pointing to a
>>>>> zswap_writepage() function that would decompress the pages and call
>>>>> __swap_writepage() on them.
>>>>>
>>>>> This might actually do away with the explicit pool size too as the compressed
>>>>> pool pages wouldn't be outside the control of the MM anymore.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm just starting to explore this but I think it has promise.
>>>>>
>>>>> Seth
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Seth,
>>>> There is a problem with the proposed idea.
>>>> The radix tree used 'struct address_space' is a part of
>>>> a bigger data structure.
>>>> The radix tree is used to translate an offset to a page.
>>>> That is ok for zswap. But struct page has a field named 'index'.
>>>> The MM assumes that this index is an offset in radix tree
>>>> where one can find the page. A lot is done by MM to sustain
>>>> this consistency.
>>>
>>> Yes, this is how it is for page cache pages. However, the MM is able to
>>> work differently with anonymous pages. In the case of an anonymous
>>> page, the mapping field points to an anon_vma struct, or, if ksm in
>>> enabled and dedup'ing the page, a private ksm tracking structure. If
>>> the anonymous page is fully unmapped and resides only in the swap cache,
>>> the page mapping is NULL. So there is precedent for the fields to mean
>>> other things.
>>
>> Hi Seth,
>> You are right that page->mapping is NULL for pages in swap_cache but
>> page_mapping() is not NULL in such a case. The mapping is taken from
>> struct address_space swapper_spaces[]. It is still an address space,
>> and it should preserve constraints for struct address_space.
>> The same happen for page->index and page_index().
>>
>>>
>>> The question is how to mark and identify zbud pages among the other page
>>> types that will be on the LRU. There are many ways. The question is
>>> what is the best and most acceptable way.
>>>
>>
>> If you consider hacking I have some idea how address_space could utilized for ZBUD.
>> One solution whould be using tags in a radix tree. Every entry in a radix tree
>> can have a few bits assigned to it. Currently 3 bits are supported:
>>
>> From include/linux/fs.h
>> #define PAGECACHE_TAG_DIRTY 0
>> #define PAGECACHE_TAG_WRITEBACK 1
>> #define PAGECACHE_TAG_TOWRITE 2
>>
>> You could add a new bit or utilize one of existing ones.
>>
>> The other idea is use a trick from a RB trees and scatter-gather lists.
>> I mean using the last bits of pointers to keep some metadata.
>> Values of 'struct page *' variables are aligned to a pointer alignment which is
>> 4 for 32-bit CPUs and 8 for 64-bit ones (not sure). This means that one could
>> could use the last bit of page pointer in a radix tree to track if a swap entry
>> refers to a lower or a higher part of a ZBUD page.
>> I think it is a serious hacking/obfuscation but it may work with the minimal
>> amount of changes to MM. Adding only (x&~3) while extracting page pointer is
>> probably enough.
>>
>> What do you think about this idea?
>
> I think it is a good one.
>
> I have to say that when I first came up with the idea, I was thinking
> the address space would be at the zswap layer and the radix slots would
> hold zbud handles, not struct page pointers.
>
> However, as I have discovered today, this is problematic when it comes
> to reclaim and migration and serializing access.
>
> I wanted to do as much as possible in the zswap layer since anything
> done in the zbud layer would need to be duplicated in any other future
> allocator that zswap wanted to support.
>
> Unfortunately, zbud abstracts away the struct page and that visibility
> is needed to properly do what we are talking about.
>
> So maybe it is inevitable that this will need to be in the zbud code
> with the radix tree slots pointing to struct pages after all.
>

But in this way, zswap_frontswap_load() can't find zswap_entry. We still
need the rbtree in current zswap.

> I like the idea of masking the bit into the struct page pointer to
> indicate which buddy maps to the offset.
>

I have no idea why we need this.
My idea is connect zbud page with a address space and add zbud page to
LRU list only without any radix tree.

zswap_entry can be still in rbtree or maybe changed to radix tree.
There is a sample code in my previous email.

--
Regards,
-Bob


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-09-28 05:01    [W:0.109 / U:14.084 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site