[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171019043032.GY5109@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 21:30:32 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: Srividya Desireddy <srividya.dr@...sung.com>,
"sjenning@...hat.com" <sjenning@...hat.com>,
"ddstreet@...e.org" <ddstreet@...e.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"penberg@...nel.org" <penberg@...nel.org>,
Dinakar Reddy Pathireddy <dinakar.p@...sung.com>,
SHARAN ALLUR <sharan.allur@...sung.com>,
RAJIB BASU <rajib.basu@...sung.com>,
JUHUN KIM <juhunkim@...sung.com>,
"srividya.desireddy@...il.com" <srividya.desireddy@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] zswap: Same-filled pages handling
> Yes. Every 64-bit repeating pattern is also a 32-bit repeating pattern.
> Supporting a 64-bit pattern on a 32-bit kernel is painful, but it makes
> no sense to *not* support a 64-bit pattern on a 64-bit kernel.
But a 32bit repeating pattern is not necessarily a 64bit pattern.
>This is the same approach used in zram, fwiw.
Sounds bogus.
-Andi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists