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  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:	Tue, 9 Apr 2013 12:54:23 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <>
To:	Minchan Kim <>
	Hugh Dickins <>,
	Seth Jennings <>,
	Nitin Gupta <>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <>,
	Shaohua Li <>,
	Dan Magenheimer <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: remove compressed copy from zram in-memory

On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 10:02:31 +0900 Minchan Kim <> wrote:

> > Also, what's up with the SWP_BLKDEV test?  zram doesn't support
> > SWP_FILE?  Why on earth not?
> > 
> > Putting swap_slot_free_notify() into block_device_operations seems
> > rather wrong.  It precludes zram-over-swapfiles for all time and means
> > that other subsystems cannot get notifications for swap slot freeing
> > for swapfile-backed swap.
> Zram is just pseudo-block device so anyone can format it with any FSes
> and swapon a file. In such case, he can't get a benefit from
> swap_slot_free_notify. But I think it's not a severe problem because
> there is no reason to use a file-swap on zram. If anyone want to use it,
> I'd like to know the reason. If it's reasonable, we have to rethink a
> wheel and it's another story, IMHO.

My point is that making the swap_slot_free_notify() callback a
blockdev-specific thing was restrictive.  What happens if someone wants
to use it for swapfile-backed swap?  This has nothing to do with zram.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists