On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 8:25 AM Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [...] > I'd also rename cgroup_memory_noswap to cgroup_swapaccount - to match > the commandline and (hopefully) make a bit clearer what it effects. Do we really need to keep supporting "swapaccount=0"? Is swap page_counter really a performance issue for systems with memcg and swap? To me, deprecating "swapaccount=0" simplifies already complicated code.
