Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] mm/zswap: Make shrink_worker writeback cursor per-memcg

[Yosry Ahmed]

> But OTOH, this does seem like a recipe for inefficient reclaim. We
> might exhaust hotter memory of a cgroup while sparing colder memory of
> another cgroup... But maybe if they're all cold anyway, then who
> cares, and eventually you'll get to the cold stuff of other child?

Forgot to respond to this part, the unfairness is limited to the batch
size per-invocation, so it should be fine as long as you don't divide
the amount over 100 iterations for some reason. Also yes, all memory
in zswap is cold, the relative coldness is not that important (e.g.
compared to relative coldness during reclaim).