Hello, Sorry for the late response. I was on vacation and then was busy. On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 02:56:24AM +0000, David Horner wrote: > > [2/3] > > > But why isn't mem_used_max writable? (save tearing down and rebuilding > device to reset max) I don't know what you mean but I will make it writable so user can reset it to zero when they want. > > static DEVICE_ATTR(mem_used_max, S_IRUGO, mem_used_max_show, NULL); > > static DEVICE_ATTR(mem_used_max, S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR, mem_used_max_show, NULL); > > with a check in the store() that the new value is positive and less > than current max? > > > I'm also a little puzzled why there is a new API zs_get_max_size_bytes if > the data is accessible through sysfs? > Especially if max limit will be (as you propose for [3/3]) through accessed > through zsmalloc and hence zram needn't access. I don't know why you meant. Anyway, I will resend revised version and Cc you. Please, comment on that. :) > > > > [3/3] > I concur that the zram limit is best implemented in zsmalloc. > I am looking forward to that revised code. Thanks! > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in > the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, > see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . > Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a> -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>