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]
Message-ID: <20170825074533.GB5535@tigerII.localdomain>
Date:   Fri, 25 Aug 2017 16:45:33 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...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, Nick Terrell <terrelln@...com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] zram: add zstd to the supported algorithms list

On (08/25/17 14:36), Minchan Kim wrote:
[..]
> > hmmm... frankly, I don't think it would confuse anyone. the code is
> > there - compiled - anyway, and the module is visible in /proc/crypto
> > etc. if we will make it unavailable in zram then this can be confusing,
> > probably... if anyone ever pays any attention at all. my guess is that
> > people look what's in /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm just once, then
> > they set up a create-zram script/systemd unit file/etc. and forget
> > about it.
> 
> Although we don't show "deflate", zram still supports

right. I forgot about it :) [... and I have authored that code]

> Again, my point is that I want to show limited representative compression
> (high speed/low comp, low speed/high comp, mid/mid) algorithm via
> /sys/block/zram0/comp_algorithm rather than adding new entry whenever
> new algorithm is added on.

ok, will send out a patch set.



that may lead to a bigger/more general question:

- if zstd is so much better, then do we need deflate/inflate at all in
  the kernel? may be zstd can replace it?

what do you think, Nick?

	-ss

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ