Hi Seth, On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 05:18:57PM -0500, Seth Jennings wrote: > On 07/27/2012 01:18 PM, Seth Jennings wrote: > > zcache is the remaining piece of code required to support in-kernel > > memory compression. The other two features, cleancache and frontswap, > > have been promoted to mainline in 3.0 and 3.5. This patchset > > promotes zcache from the staging tree to mainline. > > > > Based on the level of activity and contributions we're seeing from a > > diverse set of people and interests, I think zcache has matured to the > > point where it makes sense to promote this out of staging. > > I am wondering if there is any more discussion to be had on > the topic of promoting zcache. The discussion got dominated > by performance concerns, but hopefully my latest performance > metrics have alleviated those concerns for most and shown > the continuing value of zcache in both I/O and runtime savings. > > I'm not saying that zcache development is complete by any > means. There are still many improvements that can be made. > I'm just saying that I believe it is stable and beneficial > enough to leave the staging tree. > > Seth I want to do some clean up on zcache but I'm okay after it is promoted if Andrew merge it. But I'm not sure he doesn't mind it due to not good code quality which includes not enough comment, not good variable/function name, many code duplication of ramster). Anyway, I think we should unify common code between zcache and ramster before promoting at least. Otherwise, it would make code refactoring hard because we always have to touch both side for just a clean up. It means zcache contributor for the clean up should know well ramster too and it's not desirable. > _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
