linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] rust: zpool: add abstraction for zpool drivers

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: <20250826124454.GA1502@cmpxchg.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2025 14:44:54 +0200
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To: Vitaly Wool <vitaly.wool@...sulko.se>
Cc: rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
	Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
	Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
	"Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
	Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
	Bjorn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
	Benno Lossin <lossin@...nel.org>,
	Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>,
	Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
	Yosry Ahmed <yosry.ahmed@...ux.dev>, Nhat Pham <nphamcs@...il.com>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] rust: zpool: add abstraction for zpool drivers

On Sat, Aug 23, 2025 at 03:04:19PM +0200, Vitaly Wool wrote:
> Zpool is a common frontend for memory storage pool implementations.
> These pools are typically used to store compressed memory objects,
> e. g. for Zswap, the lightweight compressed cache for swap pages.
> 
> This patch provides the interface to use Zpool in Rust kernel code,
> thus enabling Rust implementations of Zpool allocators for Zswap.

The zpool indirection is on its way out.

When you submitted an alternate allocator backend recently, the
resounding feedback from the zswap maintainers was that improvements
should happen to zsmalloc incrementally. It is a lot of code and has a
lot of features that go beyond allocation strategy. We do not want to
fork it and fragment this space again with niche, incomplete backends.

It's frustrating that you not only ignored this, but then went ahead
and made other people invest their time and effort into this as well.