Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Sender: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 3 Nov 2022 10:11:10 -0700
From:   Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To:     Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 2/9] zram: Add recompression algorithm sysfs knob
Message-ID: <Y2P2LqG5nzxBvIEi@google.com>
References: <20221018045533.2396670-1-senozhatsky@chromium.org>
 <20221018045533.2396670-3-senozhatsky@chromium.org>
 <Y2LP0OWF/WTnkSne@google.com>
 <Y2Mv4l+V9iCv9EMg@google.com>
 <Y2M/DeLwab0o7btv@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Y2M/DeLwab0o7btv@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 01:09:49PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (22/11/03 12:05), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > What is the use case for removal of a secondary algorithm?
> > 
> > > My point is that we don't need to implement it atm but makes the
> > > interface to open the possibility for future extension.
> > > 
> > > What do you think?
> > 
> > So, as far as I understand, we don't have reason to add remove_recomp_algo
> > right now. And existing recomp_algo does not enforce any particular format,
> > it can be extended. Right now we accept "$name" but can do something like
> > "$name:$priority".
> 
> Or with keywords:
> 
> 	name=STRING priority=INT
> 
> and the only legal priority for now is 1.

I like it.