On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 12:19:19PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 09:48:58AM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: > > > > This patch breaks zbud and z3fold because they haven't been converted > > to the new interface. > > I've rebased my zswap SG patch on top of your series. I've removed > all the mapping code from zpool/zsmalloc and pushed it out to zram > instead. > > This patch depends on a new memcpy_sglist function which I've just > posted a patch for: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-crypto/patch/Z8kXhLb681E_FLzs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > From a77ee529b831e7e606ed2a5b723b74ce234a3915 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2025 12:13:58 +0800 > Subject: [PATCH] mm: zswap: Give non-linear objects to Crypto API > > Instead of copying non-linear objects into a buffer, use the > scatterlist to give them directly to the Crypto API. > > Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> The zswap and zsmalloc look good and the code is simpler. I am fine with this approach if Sergey is fine with it, although I wonder if we should update Sergey's patches in mm-unstable do this directly. Currently we are switching from mapping APIs to read/write APIs, and then quickly to the pinning APIs. The history will be confusing. Sergey, do you prefer if we keep things as-is, or if you update your series to incorporate Herbert's changes for zsmalloc/zram, then I can update my series to incorporate the changes in zswap? We can also combine the series into a single updated one with zsmalloc/zram/zswap changes. Let me know what you prefer.
