On Sat, Nov 05, 2022 at 08:25:44AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > On (22/11/04 09:34), Minchan Kim wrote: > > > > > So, as far as I understand, we don't have reason to add remove_recomp_algo > > > > > right now. And existing recomp_algo does not enforce any particular format, > > > > > it can be extended. Right now we accept "$name" but can do something like > > > > > "$name:$priority". The only thing that we probably need to do is rename > > > > > recomp_algo to either add_recomp_algo or register_recomp_algo? > > > > > > > > Yeah, I like the name and priority format. > > > > > > > > Only question is how we could support algorithm selection change > > > > under considering multiple secondary algorithms. > > > > > > So what I was thinking about, and I'm still in the mental model that > > > re-compression is a user-space event, just like writeback, extension > > > of recompress sysfs knob with "algo_index" (or something similar) which > > > will mirror algorithm priority. > > > > > > Example: > > > > > > Configure 2 alternative algos, with priority 1 and 2 > > > > > > echo "name=lz4 priority=1" > recomp_algo > > > echo "name=lz5 priority=2" > recomp_algo > > > > > > Recompress pages using algo 1 and algo 2 > > > > > > echo "type=huge threshold=3000 algo_idx=1" > recompress > > > echo "type=idle threshold=2000 algo_idx=2" > recompress > > > > > > Maybe we can even pass algo name instead of idx. > > > > Let's use name rather than index. > > OK. Any preference on the keyword? "name="? "algo="? "algorithm="? > "compressor="? "comp="? > > I want use the same keyword for recomp_algo. I sort of like "algo=", > but not sure. +1 with algo
