Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] drivers/staging: zcache: host services and PAM services

[Minchan Kim]

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 1:39 AM, Dan Magenheimer
> <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> From: Minchan Kim [mailto:minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx]
>>
>>> As I read your comment, I can't find the benefit of zram compared to
>>> frontswap.
>>
>> Well, I am biased, but I agree that frontswap is a better technical
>> solution than zram. ;-) ÂBut "dynamic-ity" is very important to
>> me and may be less important to others.
>>
>> I thought of these other differences, both technical and
>> non-technical:
>>
>> - Zram is minimally invasive to the swap subsystem, requiring only
>> Âone hook which is already upstream (though see below) and is
>> Âapparently already used by some Linux users. ÂFrontswap is somewhat
>
> Yes. I think what someone is using it is a problem.
>
>> Âmore invasive and, UNTIL zcache-was-kztmem was posted a few weeks
>> Âago, had no non-Xen users (though some distros are already shipping
>> Âthe hooks in their kernels because Xen supports it); as a result,
>> Âfrontswap has gotten almost no review by kernel swap subsystem
>> Âexperts who I'm guessing weren't interested in anything that
>> Ârequired Xen to use... hopefully that barrier is now resolved
>> Â(but bottom line is frontswap is not yet upstream).
>
> That's why I suggested to remove frontswap in this turn.
> If any swap experts has a interest, maybe you can't receive any ack or

Typo.
If any swap experts don't have a interest,


-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/