[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130411201002.GD28296@cerebellum>
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists