[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <520DED04.2030605@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 17:12:36 +0800
From: Bob Liu <bob.liu@...cle.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
CC: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nok.org>,
Luigi Semenzato <semenzato@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/5] zram/zsmalloc promotion
Hi Mel,
On 08/16/2013 04:33 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
>
> I already said I recognise it has a large number of users in the field
> and users count a lot more than me complaining. If it gets promoted then
> I expect it will be on those grounds.
>
> My position is that I think it's a bad idea because it is clear there is no
> plan or intention of ever brining zram and zswap together. Instead we are
> to have two features providing similar functionality with zram diverging
> further from zswap. Ultimately I believe this will increase maintenance
> headaches. It'll get even more entertaining if/when someone ever tries
> to reimplement zcache although since Dan left I do not believe anyone is
> planning to try. I will not be acking this series but there many be enough
I already reimplemented zcache based on mm/zbud.c.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/104824
I'll pay more attention to the problems of zswap as you mentioned.
> developers that are actually willing to maintain a duel zram/zswap mess
> to make it happen anyway.
>
--
Regards,
-Bob
--
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