On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 5:37 PM Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On (24/09/24 11:29), Chris Li wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 8:56 AM Chris Li <chrisl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [..] > > Given the merge window is closing. I suggest just reverting this > > change. As it is the fix also causing regression in the swap stress > > test for me. It is possible that is my test setup issue, but reverting > > sounds the safe bet. > > The patch in question is just a kfree() call that is only executed > during zram reset and that fixes tiny memory leaks when zram is > configured with alternative (re-compression) streams. I cannot > imagine how that can have any impact on runtime, that makes no > sense to me, I'm not sure that revert is justified here. > After some discussion with Sergey, we have more progress on understanding the swap stress test regression. One of the triggering conditions is I don't have zram lz4 config enabled, (the config option name has changed) and the test script tries to set lz4 on zram and fails. It will fall back to the lzo. Anyway, if I have zram lz4 configured, my stress test can pass with the fix. Still I don't understand why disabling lz4 config can trigger it. Need to dig more. Agree that we don't need to revert this. Chris
