On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 08:42:00AM -0800, Shakeel Butt wrote: > 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. Now that you mention it, it's probably really not worth it. I'll replace my cleanup patch with a removal patch that eliminates everything behind swapaccount= except for a deprecation warning...
