1 Frontswap provides a "transcendent memory" interface for swap pages.
2 In some environments, dramatic performance savings may be obtained because
3 swapped pages are saved in RAM (or a RAM-like device) instead of a swap disk.
5 (Note, frontswap -- and cleancache (merged at 3.0) -- are the "frontends"
6 and the only necessary changes to the core kernel for transcendent memory;
7 all other supporting code -- the "backends" -- is implemented as drivers.
8 See the LWN.net article "Transcendent memory in a nutshell" for a detailed
9 overview of frontswap and related kernel parts:
10 https://lwn.net/Articles/454795/ )
12 Frontswap is so named because it can be thought of as the opposite of
13 a "backing" store for a swap device. The storage is assumed to be
14 a synchronous concurrency-safe page-oriented "pseudo-RAM device" conforming
15 to the requirements of transcendent memory (such as Xen's "tmem", or
16 in-kernel compressed memory, aka "zcache", or future RAM-like devices);
17 this pseudo-RAM device is not directly accessible or addressable by the
18 kernel and is of unknown and possibly time-varying size. The driver
19 links itself to frontswap by calling frontswap_register_ops to set the
20 frontswap_ops funcs appropriately and the functions it provides must
21 conform to certain policies as follows:
23 An "init" prepares the device to receive frontswap pages associated
24 with the specified swap device number (aka "type"). A "store" will
25 copy the page to transcendent memory and associate it with the type and
26 offset associated with the page. A "load" will copy the page, if found,
27 from transcendent memory into kernel memory, but will NOT remove the page
28 from transcendent memory. An "invalidate_page" will remove the page
29 from transcendent memory and an "invalidate_area" will remove ALL pages
30 associated with the swap type (e.g., like swapoff) and notify the "device"
31 to refuse further stores with that swap type.
33 Once a page is successfully stored, a matching load on the page will normally
34 succeed. So when the kernel finds itself in a situation where it needs
35 to swap out a page, it first attempts to use frontswap. If the store returns
36 success, the data has been successfully saved to transcendent memory and
37 a disk write and, if the data is later read back, a disk read are avoided.
38 If a store returns failure, transcendent memory has rejected the data, and the
39 page can be written to swap as usual.
41 If a backend chooses, frontswap can be configured as a "writethrough
42 cache" by calling frontswap_writethrough(). In this mode, the reduction
43 in swap device writes is lost (and also a non-trivial performance advantage)
44 in order to allow the backend to arbitrarily "reclaim" space used to
45 store frontswap pages to more completely manage its memory usage.
47 Note that if a page is stored and the page already exists in transcendent memory
48 (a "duplicate" store), either the store succeeds and the data is overwritten,
49 or the store fails AND the page is invalidated. This ensures stale data may
50 never be obtained from frontswap.
52 If properly configured, monitoring of frontswap is done via debugfs in
53 the /sys/kernel/debug/frontswap directory. The effectiveness of
54 frontswap can be measured (across all swap devices) with:
56 failed_stores - how many store attempts have failed
57 loads - how many loads were attempted (all should succeed)
58 succ_stores - how many store attempts have succeeded
59 invalidates - how many invalidates were attempted
61 A backend implementation may provide additional metrics.
67 When a workload starts swapping, performance falls through the floor.
68 Frontswap significantly increases performance in many such workloads by
69 providing a clean, dynamic interface to read and write swap pages to
70 "transcendent memory" that is otherwise not directly addressable to the kernel.
71 This interface is ideal when data is transformed to a different form
72 and size (such as with compression) or secretly moved (as might be
73 useful for write-balancing for some RAM-like devices). Swap pages (and
74 evicted page-cache pages) are a great use for this kind of slower-than-RAM-
75 but-much-faster-than-disk "pseudo-RAM device" and the frontswap (and
76 cleancache) interface to transcendent memory provides a nice way to read
77 and write -- and indirectly "name" -- the pages.
79 Frontswap -- and cleancache -- with a fairly small impact on the kernel,
80 provides a huge amount of flexibility for more dynamic, flexible RAM
81 utilization in various system configurations:
83 In the single kernel case, aka "zcache", pages are compressed and
84 stored in local memory, thus increasing the total anonymous pages
85 that can be safely kept in RAM. Zcache essentially trades off CPU
86 cycles used in compression/decompression for better memory utilization.
87 Benchmarks have shown little or no impact when memory pressure is
88 low while providing a significant performance improvement (25%+)
89 on some workloads under high memory pressure.
91 "RAMster" builds on zcache by adding "peer-to-peer" transcendent memory
92 support for clustered systems. Frontswap pages are locally compressed
93 as in zcache, but then "remotified" to another system's RAM. This
94 allows RAM to be dynamically load-balanced back-and-forth as needed,
95 i.e. when system A is overcommitted, it can swap to system B, and
96 vice versa. RAMster can also be configured as a memory server so
97 many servers in a cluster can swap, dynamically as needed, to a single
98 server configured with a large amount of RAM... without pre-configuring
99 how much of the RAM is available for each of the clients!
101 In the virtual case, the whole point of virtualization is to statistically
102 multiplex physical resources across the varying demands of multiple
103 virtual machines. This is really hard to do with RAM and efforts to do
104 it well with no kernel changes have essentially failed (except in some
105 well-publicized special-case workloads).
106 Specifically, the Xen Transcendent Memory backend allows otherwise
107 "fallow" hypervisor-owned RAM to not only be "time-shared" between multiple
108 virtual machines, but the pages can be compressed and deduplicated to
109 optimize RAM utilization. And when guest OS's are induced to surrender
110 underutilized RAM (e.g. with "selfballooning"), sudden unexpected
111 memory pressure may result in swapping; frontswap allows those pages
112 to be swapped to and from hypervisor RAM (if overall host system memory
113 conditions allow), thus mitigating the potentially awful performance impact
114 of unplanned swapping.
116 A KVM implementation is underway and has been RFC'ed to lkml. And,
117 using frontswap, investigation is also underway on the use of NVM as
118 a memory extension technology.
120 2) Sure there may be performance advantages in some situations, but
121 what's the space/time overhead of frontswap?
123 If CONFIG_FRONTSWAP is disabled, every frontswap hook compiles into
124 nothingness and the only overhead is a few extra bytes per swapon'ed
125 swap device. If CONFIG_FRONTSWAP is enabled but no frontswap "backend"
126 registers, there is one extra global variable compared to zero for
127 every swap page read or written. If CONFIG_FRONTSWAP is enabled
128 AND a frontswap backend registers AND the backend fails every "store"
129 request (i.e. provides no memory despite claiming it might),
130 CPU overhead is still negligible -- and since every frontswap fail
131 precedes a swap page write-to-disk, the system is highly likely
132 to be I/O bound and using a small fraction of a percent of a CPU
133 will be irrelevant anyway.
135 As for space, if CONFIG_FRONTSWAP is enabled AND a frontswap backend
136 registers, one bit is allocated for every swap page for every swap
137 device that is swapon'd. This is added to the EIGHT bits (which
138 was sixteen until about 2.6.34) that the kernel already allocates
139 for every swap page for every swap device that is swapon'd. (Hugh
140 Dickins has observed that frontswap could probably steal one of
141 the existing eight bits, but let's worry about that minor optimization
142 later.) For very large swap disks (which are rare) on a standard
143 4K pagesize, this is 1MB per 32GB swap.
145 When swap pages are stored in transcendent memory instead of written
146 out to disk, there is a side effect that this may create more memory
147 pressure that can potentially outweigh the other advantages. A
148 backend, such as zcache, must implement policies to carefully (but
149 dynamically) manage memory limits to ensure this doesn't happen.
151 3) OK, how about a quick overview of what this frontswap patch does
152 in terms that a kernel hacker can grok?
154 Let's assume that a frontswap "backend" has registered during
155 kernel initialization; this registration indicates that this
156 frontswap backend has access to some "memory" that is not directly
157 accessible by the kernel. Exactly how much memory it provides is
158 entirely dynamic and random.
160 Whenever a swap-device is swapon'd frontswap_init() is called,
161 passing the swap device number (aka "type") as a parameter.
162 This notifies frontswap to expect attempts to "store" swap pages
163 associated with that number.
165 Whenever the swap subsystem is readying a page to write to a swap
166 device (c.f swap_writepage()), frontswap_store is called. Frontswap
167 consults with the frontswap backend and if the backend says it does NOT
168 have room, frontswap_store returns -1 and the kernel swaps the page
169 to the swap device as normal. Note that the response from the frontswap
170 backend is unpredictable to the kernel; it may choose to never accept a
171 page, it could accept every ninth page, or it might accept every
172 page. But if the backend does accept a page, the data from the page
173 has already been copied and associated with the type and offset,
174 and the backend guarantees the persistence of the data. In this case,
175 frontswap sets a bit in the "frontswap_map" for the swap device
176 corresponding to the page offset on the swap device to which it would
177 otherwise have written the data.
179 When the swap subsystem needs to swap-in a page (swap_readpage()),
180 it first calls frontswap_load() which checks the frontswap_map to
181 see if the page was earlier accepted by the frontswap backend. If
182 it was, the page of data is filled from the frontswap backend and
183 the swap-in is complete. If not, the normal swap-in code is
184 executed to obtain the page of data from the real swap device.
186 So every time the frontswap backend accepts a page, a swap device read
187 and (potentially) a swap device write are replaced by a "frontswap backend
188 store" and (possibly) a "frontswap backend loads", which are presumably much
191 4) Can't frontswap be configured as a "special" swap device that is
192 just higher priority than any real swap device (e.g. like zswap,
193 or maybe swap-over-nbd/NFS)?
195 No. First, the existing swap subsystem doesn't allow for any kind of
196 swap hierarchy. Perhaps it could be rewritten to accommodate a hierarchy,
197 but this would require fairly drastic changes. Even if it were
198 rewritten, the existing swap subsystem uses the block I/O layer which
199 assumes a swap device is fixed size and any page in it is linearly
200 addressable. Frontswap barely touches the existing swap subsystem,
201 and works around the constraints of the block I/O subsystem to provide
202 a great deal of flexibility and dynamicity.
204 For example, the acceptance of any swap page by the frontswap backend is
205 entirely unpredictable. This is critical to the definition of frontswap
206 backends because it grants completely dynamic discretion to the
207 backend. In zcache, one cannot know a priori how compressible a page is.
208 "Poorly" compressible pages can be rejected, and "poorly" can itself be
209 defined dynamically depending on current memory constraints.
211 Further, frontswap is entirely synchronous whereas a real swap
212 device is, by definition, asynchronous and uses block I/O. The
213 block I/O layer is not only unnecessary, but may perform "optimizations"
214 that are inappropriate for a RAM-oriented device including delaying
215 the write of some pages for a significant amount of time. Synchrony is
216 required to ensure the dynamicity of the backend and to avoid thorny race
217 conditions that would unnecessarily and greatly complicate frontswap
218 and/or the block I/O subsystem. That said, only the initial "store"
219 and "load" operations need be synchronous. A separate asynchronous thread
220 is free to manipulate the pages stored by frontswap. For example,
221 the "remotification" thread in RAMster uses standard asynchronous
222 kernel sockets to move compressed frontswap pages to a remote machine.
223 Similarly, a KVM guest-side implementation could do in-guest compression
224 and use "batched" hypercalls.
226 In a virtualized environment, the dynamicity allows the hypervisor
227 (or host OS) to do "intelligent overcommit". For example, it can
228 choose to accept pages only until host-swapping might be imminent,
229 then force guests to do their own swapping.
231 There is a downside to the transcendent memory specifications for
232 frontswap: Since any "store" might fail, there must always be a real
233 slot on a real swap device to swap the page. Thus frontswap must be
234 implemented as a "shadow" to every swapon'd device with the potential
235 capability of holding every page that the swap device might have held
236 and the possibility that it might hold no pages at all. This means
237 that frontswap cannot contain more pages than the total of swapon'd
238 swap devices. For example, if NO swap device is configured on some
239 installation, frontswap is useless. Swapless portable devices
240 can still use frontswap but a backend for such devices must configure
241 some kind of "ghost" swap device and ensure that it is never used.
243 5) Why this weird definition about "duplicate stores"? If a page
244 has been previously successfully stored, can't it always be
245 successfully overwritten?
247 Nearly always it can, but no, sometimes it cannot. Consider an example
248 where data is compressed and the original 4K page has been compressed
249 to 1K. Now an attempt is made to overwrite the page with data that
250 is non-compressible and so would take the entire 4K. But the backend
251 has no more space. In this case, the store must be rejected. Whenever
252 frontswap rejects a store that would overwrite, it also must invalidate
253 the old data and ensure that it is no longer accessible. Since the
254 swap subsystem then writes the new data to the read swap device,
255 this is the correct course of action to ensure coherency.
257 6) What is frontswap_shrink for?
259 When the (non-frontswap) swap subsystem swaps out a page to a real
260 swap device, that page is only taking up low-value pre-allocated disk
261 space. But if frontswap has placed a page in transcendent memory, that
262 page may be taking up valuable real estate. The frontswap_shrink
263 routine allows code outside of the swap subsystem to force pages out
264 of the memory managed by frontswap and back into kernel-addressable memory.
265 For example, in RAMster, a "suction driver" thread will attempt
266 to "repatriate" pages sent to a remote machine back to the local machine;
267 this is driven using the frontswap_shrink mechanism when memory pressure
270 7) Why does the frontswap patch create the new include file swapfile.h?
272 The frontswap code depends on some swap-subsystem-internal data
273 structures that have, over the years, moved back and forth between
274 static and global. This seemed a reasonable compromise: Define
275 them as global but declare them in a new include file that isn't
276 included by the large number of source files that include swap.h.
278 Dan Magenheimer, last updated April 9, 2012