[<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
 
