> From: Seth Jennings [mailto:sjenning@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 4/8] zswap: add to mm/ > > On 02/18/2013 01:55 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote: > >> From: Seth Jennings [mailto:sjenning@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > >> Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 4/8] zswap: add to mm/ > >> > >> On 02/15/2013 10:04 PM, Ric Mason wrote: > >>>> + * certain event is occurring. > >>>> +*/ > >>>> +static u64 zswap_pool_limit_hit; > >>>> +static u64 zswap_reject_compress_poor; > >>>> +static u64 zswap_reject_zsmalloc_fail; > >>>> +static u64 zswap_reject_kmemcache_fail; > >>>> +static u64 zswap_duplicate_entry; > >>>> + > >>>> +/********************************* > >>>> +* tunables > >>>> +**********************************/ > >>>> +/* Enable/disable zswap (disabled by default, fixed at boot for > >>>> now) */ > >>>> +static bool zswap_enabled; > >>>> +module_param_named(enabled, zswap_enabled, bool, 0); > >>> > >>> please document in Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt. > >> > >> Will do. > > > > Is that a good idea? Konrad's frontswap/cleancache patches > > to fix frontswap/cleancache initialization so that backends > > can be built/loaded as modules may be merged for 3.9. > > AFAIK, module parameters are not included in kernel-parameters.txt. > > This is true. However, the frontswap/cleancache init stuff isn't the > only reason zswap is built-in only. The writeback code depends on > non-exported kernel symbols: > > swapcache_free > __swap_writepage > __add_to_swap_cache > swapcache_prepare > swapper_space > end_swap_bio_write > > I know a fix is as trivial as exporting them, but I didn't want to > take on that debate right now. Hmmm... I wonder if exporting these might be the best solution as it (unnecessarily?) exposes some swap subsystem internals. I wonder if a small change to read_swap_cache_async might be more acceptable. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
