[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160321133017.1e925cc45cdc9153d2623ef8@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 13:30:17 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
karam.lee@....com, sangseok.lee@....com, chan.jeong@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] zram: revive swap_slot_free_notify
On Fri, 18 Mar 2016 16:58:31 +0900 Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org> wrote:
> <b430e9d1c6d4> "remove compressed copy from zram in-memory"
> applied swap_slot_free_notify call in *end_swap_bio_read* to
> remove duplicated memory between zram and memory.
>
> However, with introducing rw_page in zram <8c7f01025f7b>
> "zram: implement rw_page operation of zram", it became void
> because rw_page doesn't need bio.
>
> This patch restores the function for rw_page.
This is a bit mysterious. What is the actual runtime effect of the
patch? I assume that 8c7f01025f7b caused duplication of memory and
that the only problem is additional resource consumption? If so, what
are the observable effects? etcetera, please.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists