Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756221Ab1BIX6V (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Feb 2011 18:58:21 -0500 Received: from mail-iy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.210.174]:55753 "EHLO mail-iy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755986Ab1BIX6T convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Feb 2011 18:58:19 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=w4vmDzRNM4fzuQB0NpM5FvUUjCNUbfcKnwjq50FQDBiUmTiz3cLBDwnQbJbKle1keW RPoB9Jy4yOgTEh7YWAeVj7vkw9SeXY3K31f4DXBDX3TB6PMr9JL1R4i0yhzFhKmnOwR3 lKhhxtkmWmjGcyTEX44/Dsc0ynzf7Llut8iMM= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <5c529b08-cf36-43c7-b368-f3f602faf358@default> Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 08:58:19 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] drivers/staging: zcache: host services and PAM services From: Minchan Kim To: Dan Magenheimer Cc: gregkh@suse.de, Chris Mason , akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, matthew@wil.cx, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, ngupta@vflare.org, jeremy@goop.org, Kurt Hackel , npiggin@kernel.dk, riel@redhat.com, Konrad Wilk , mel@csn.ul.ie, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn, tytso@mit.edu, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, hughd@google.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1786 Lines: 46 On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Minchan Kim wrote: > On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 1:39 AM, Dan Magenheimer > wrote: >> >> >>> From: Minchan Kim [mailto:minchan.kim@gmail.com] >> >>> As I read your comment, I can't find the benefit of zram compared to >>> frontswap. >> >> Well, I am biased, but I agree that frontswap is a better technical >> solution than zram. ;-)  But "dynamic-ity" is very important to >> me and may be less important to others. >> >> I thought of these other differences, both technical and >> non-technical: >> >> - Zram is minimally invasive to the swap subsystem, requiring only >>  one hook which is already upstream (though see below) and is >>  apparently already used by some Linux users.  Frontswap is somewhat > > Yes. I think what someone is using it is a problem. > >>  more invasive and, UNTIL zcache-was-kztmem was posted a few weeks >>  ago, had no non-Xen users (though some distros are already shipping >>  the hooks in their kernels because Xen supports it); as a result, >>  frontswap has gotten almost no review by kernel swap subsystem >>  experts who I'm guessing weren't interested in anything that >>  required Xen to use... hopefully that barrier is now resolved >>  (but bottom line is frontswap is not yet upstream). > > That's why I suggested to remove frontswap in this turn. > If any swap experts has a interest, maybe you can't receive any ack or Typo. If any swap experts don't have a interest, -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/