[..] > > > In the "Before" scenario, when zswap does not store mTHP, only allocations > > > count towards the cgroup memory limit. However, in the "After" scenario, > > > with the introduction of zswap_store() mTHP, both, allocations as well as > > > the zswap compressed pool usage from all 70 processes are counted > > towards > > > the memory limit. As a result, we see higher swapout activity in the > > > "After" data. Hence, more time is spent doing reclaim as the zswap cgroup > > > charge leads to more frequent memory.high breaches. > > > > > > This causes degradation in throughput and sys time with zswap mTHP, more > > so > > > in case of zstd than deflate-iaa. Compress latency could play a part in > > > this - when there is more swapout activity happening, a slower compressor > > > would cause allocations to stall for any/all of the 70 processes. > > > > > > In my opinion, even though the test set up does not provide an accurate > > > way for a direct before/after comparison (because of zswap usage being > > > counted in cgroup, hence towards the memory.high), it still seems > > > reasonable for zswap_store to support (m)THP, so that further performance > > > improvements can be implemented. > > > > Are you saying that in the "Before" data we end up skipping zswap > > completely because of using mTHPs? > > That's right, Yosry. > > > > > Does it make more sense to turn CONFIG_THP_SWAP in the "Before" data > > We could do this, however I am not sure if turning off CONFIG_THP_SWAP > will have other side-effects in terms of disabling mm code paths outside of > zswap that are intended to be mTHP optimizations that could again skew > the before/after comparisons. Yeah that's possible, but right now we are testing mTHP swapout that does not go through zswap at all vs. mTHP swapout going through zswap. I think what we really want to measure is 4K swapout going through zswap vs. mTHP swapout going through zswap. This assumes that current zswap setups disable CONFIG_THP_SWAP, so we would be measuring the benefit of allowing them to enable CONFIG_THP_SWAP by supporting it properly in zswap. If some setups with zswap have CONFIG_THP_SWAP enabled then that's a different story, but we already have the data for this case as well right now in case this is a legitimate setup. Adding Chris Li here from Google. We have CONFIG_THP_SWAP disabled with zswap, so for us we would want to know the benefit of supporting CONFIG_THP_SWAP properly in zswap. At least I think so :) > > Will wait for Nhat's comments as well. > > Thanks, > Kanchana > > > to force the mTHPs to be split and for the data to be stored in zswap? > > This would be a more fair Before/After comparison where the memory > > goes to zswap in both cases, but "Before" has to be split because of > > zswap's lack of support for mTHP. I assume most setups relying on > > zswap will be turning CONFIG_THP_SWAP off today anyway, but maybe not. > > Nhat, is this something you can share?