[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <502ACED1.9060808@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 17:18:57 -0500
From: Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>,
Robert Jennings <rcj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] promote zcache from staging
On 07/27/2012 01:18 PM, Seth Jennings wrote:
> zcache is the remaining piece of code required to support in-kernel
> memory compression. The other two features, cleancache and frontswap,
> have been promoted to mainline in 3.0 and 3.5. This patchset
> promotes zcache from the staging tree to mainline.
>
> Based on the level of activity and contributions we're seeing from a
> diverse set of people and interests, I think zcache has matured to the
> point where it makes sense to promote this out of staging.
I am wondering if there is any more discussion to be had on
the topic of promoting zcache. The discussion got dominated
by performance concerns, but hopefully my latest performance
metrics have alleviated those concerns for most and shown
the continuing value of zcache in both I/O and runtime savings.
I'm not saying that zcache development is complete by any
means. There are still many improvements that can be made.
I'm just saying that I believe it is stable and beneficial
enough to leave the staging tree.
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists