linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] zram: Implement multi-page write-back

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <tencent_49B963DEC2577A5762510FF7CF38ADEBF306@qq.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2025 16:27:05 +0800
From: Yuwen Chen <ywen.chen@...mail.com>
To: senozhatsky@...omium.org
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	axboe@...nel.dk,
	bgeffon@...gle.com,
	licayy@...look.com,
	linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org,
	liumartin@...gle.com,
	minchan@...nel.org,
	richardycc@...gle.com,
	ywen.chen@...mail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] zram: Implement multi-page write-back

On (25/11/12 21:40), Minchan Kim wrote:

> My preference is [1], which is very close to how current post-processing
> is implemented in zram, w/o complexity that dedicated kthread handling
> introduces and so on.

> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/45b418277c6ae613783b9ecc714c96313ceb841d.1763013260.git.senozhatsky@chromium.org

Yes, I also agree with this. Introducing threads in writeback will increase
the complexity.