On (07/08/15 00:01), Minchan Kim wrote:
[..]
> > But why would we do this? Yes, it's kinda-sorta bad -- we were not
> > able to register zspool shrinker, so there will be no automatic
> > compaction... And that's it.
> >
> > It does not affect zsmalloc/zram functionality by any means. Including
> > compaction itself -- user still has a way to compact zspool (manually).
> > And in some scenarios user will never even see automatic compaction in
> > action (assuming that there is a plenty of RAM available).
> >
> > Can you explain your decision?
>
> I don't think it would fail in *real practice*.
> Althout it might happen, what does zram could help in that cases?
>
This argument depends on the current register_shrinker() implementation,
should some one add additional return branch there and it's done.
> If it were failed, it means there is already little memory on the system
> so zram could not be helpful for those environment.
> IOW, zram should be enabled earlier.
>
> If you want it strongly, please reproduce such failing and prove that
> zram was helpful for the system.
No, thanks. I'll just remove it.
-ss
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
