Hello, On (06/09/16 10:34), Minchan Kim wrote: > On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 10:51:28AM -0400, Dan Streetman wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 5:39 AM, Geliang Tang <geliangtang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > This patch adds zpool support for zram, it will allow us to use both > > > the zpool api and directly zsmalloc api in zram. > > > > besides the problems below, this was discussed a while ago and I > > believe Minchan is still against it, as nobody has so far shown what > > the benefit to zram would be; zram doesn't need the predictability, or > > evictability, of zbud or z3fold. > > Right. > > Geliang, I cannot ack without any *detail* that what's the problem of > zram/zsmalloc, why we can't fix it in zsmalloc itself. > The zbud and zsmalloc is otally different design to aim different goal > determinism vs efficiency so you can choose what you want between zswap > and zram rather than mixing the features. I'd also probably Cc Vitaly Wool on this (http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=146537877415982&w=2) -ss -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>