linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] mm: remove zpool

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: <20250904164710.210731847fe25d9419203886@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2025 16:47:10 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Vitaly Wool <vitaly.wool@...sulko.se>
Cc: hannes@...xchg.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Vlastimil Babka
 <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] mm: remove zpool

On Thu,  4 Sep 2025 11:33:24 +0200 Vitaly Wool <vitaly.wool@...sulko.se> wrote:

> > With zswap using zsmalloc directly, there are no more in-tree users of
> > this code. Remove it.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
> 
> Per the previous discussions, this gets a *NACK* from my side. There is
> hardly anything _technical_ preventing new in-tree users of zpool API.
> zpool API is neutral and well-defined, I don’t see *any* good reason for
> it to be phased out.

Well, we have the zpool code and we know it works.  If a later need for
the zpool layer is demonstrated then we can unremove the code at that
time.