linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] zram: user per-cpu compression streams

lists.openwall.net		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 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce 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:	Mon, 2 May 2016 18:21:57 +0900
From:	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To:	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc:	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] zram: user per-cpu compression streams

On (05/02/16 17:28), Minchan Kim wrote:
[..]
> > aha... I misunderstood you. I thought you talked about the test results
> > in particular, not about zram stats in general. hm, given that we don't
> > close the door for 'idle compression streams list' yet, and may revert
> > per-cpu streams, may be we can introduce this stat in 4.8? otherwise, in
> > the worst case, we will have to trim a user visible stat file once again
> > IF we, for some reason, will decide to return idle list back (hopefully
> > we will not). does it sound OK to you to not touch the stat file now?
> 
> My concern is how we can capture such regression without introducing
> the stat of recompression? Do you have an idea? :)

...hm...  inc ->failed_writes?

... or as a dirty and ugly and illegal (read "undocumented") hack, we
probably can use ->failed_reads for that purpose. simply because I don't
think any one has ever seen ->failed_reads != 0.

	-ss