Re: [PATCH 4/6] zram: Add QPaCE zcomp backend

[Sergey Senozhatsky]

On (26/10/10 02:54), Georgi Djakov wrote:
> >> So entire qpace should go here, no? Why did you create this entire layer
> >> of indirection, singleton management under drivers/soc?
> > 
> > qpace seems to be standalone/independent arch/soc specific, and can gain
> > users outside of zram (fs compression, zswap, etc.).  zram's backends
> > potentially can disappear all together, if we switch to acomp crypto API.
> 
> Are there any plans for switching back to the acomp crypto API? We moved away
> from it some time ago and dropped all the crypto dependency in favor of the
> custom comp backends, right?

We moved from deprecated scomp API and switched to our own comp API.
There is a possibility of switching to acomp API in the future.