linux-kernel - Re: zsmalloc zbud hybrid design discussion?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:10:02 -0500
From:	Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>
Cc:	Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, Bob Liu <bob.liu@...cle.com>,
	Robert Jennings <rcj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
	Wanpeng Li <liwanp@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: zsmalloc zbud hybrid design discussion?

On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 02:35:34PM -0500, Seth Jennings wrote:
> Not a requirement:
> 
> Compaction - compaction would basically involve creating a virtual address
> space of sorts, which zsmalloc is capable of through its API with handles,
> not pointer.  However, as Dan points out this requires a structure the maintain
> the mappings and adds to complexity.  Additionally, the need for compaction
> diminishes as the allocations are short-lived with frontswap backends doing
> writeback and cleancache backends shrinking.

Of course I say this, but for zram, this can be important as the allocations
can't be moved out of memory and, therefore, are long lived.  I was speaking
from the zswap perspective.

Thanks,
Seth

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/