[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240801030027.GE16599@google.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2024 12:00:27 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
To: Nhat Pham <nphamcs@...il.com>
Cc: Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, ying.huang@...el.com,
baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, chrisl@...nel.org, david@...hat.com,
hannes@...xchg.org, hughd@...gle.com, kaleshsingh@...gle.com,
kasong@...cent.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mhocko@...e.com,
minchan@...nel.org, ryan.roberts@....com, senozhatsky@...omium.org,
shakeel.butt@...ux.dev, shy828301@...il.com, surenb@...gle.com,
v-songbaohua@...o.com, xiang@...nel.org, yosryahmed@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] mm: Introduce per-thpsize swapin control policy
On (24/07/31 11:35), Nhat Pham wrote:
>
> I'm not proposing that we kill zram right away.
>
Just for the record, zram is a generic block device and has
use-cases outside of swap. Just mkfs on /dev/zram0, mount it
and do whatever. The "kill zram" thing is not going to fly.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists