[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090321052416.6eb38759.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 05:24:16 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Nitin Gupta <nitingupta910@...il.com>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, cl@...ux-foundation.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] xvmalloc memory allocator
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 17:42:52 +0530 Nitin Gupta <nitingupta910@...il.com> wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 01:13:42 +0530 Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org> wrote:
>
> > But what is regrettable is that xvmalloc appears to be tied to
> > compressed-swap in some manner. Is it not possible to split these two
> > initiatives apart so that neither is dependent upon the other? Or is
> > compressed-swap hopelessly crippled without xvmalloc?
>
> xvmalloc itself is completely independent of compressed-swap. Infact, its
> loaded as separate kernel module (xvmalloc.ko)
That sounds good.
> However, this compression project is almost useless without this specialized
> allocator.
Why? Important information!!
See, being told all this helps us understand why xvmalloc exists. Plus
once we have a good description of _why_ xvmalloc is needed, perhaps we can
come up with alternatives which are more palatable than merging a whole new
allocator. Such as enhancing an existing one.
> >
> > (compcache is a terrible name, btw - it isn't a "compressed cache" at all!)
> >
>
> I have now heard this many times and my conscious is beginning to hurt now :)
> I will change it to match name of its block device: ramzswap sounds better?
Is there anything swap-specific about it? It's a block device, yes? I
should be able to run mkfs.ext2 on it and mount the thing?
> >> Anyways, I will move it to drivers/block.
> >
> > This sounds like it might be a backward step.
>
>
> I'm bit confused here. Last thing I want to do is block mainline merge
> because of such issues. Its real pain to maintain these things separately.
This is why I tell myself to never use the word "it" in an email message.
I assumed that you were referring to moving xvmalloc() down into
drivers/block. That would be bad, because then xvmalloc() will _never_ be
usable by anything other than ramzblock <new name!>?
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists