Re: [PATCH 0/3] mm/zram: route block swap I/O through swap_ops

[Sergey Senozhatsky]

Cc-ing Brian

On (26/06/17 11:38), Jianyue Wu wrote:
> > I fear this is going entirely in the wrong direction.
> OK. I was trying to build on your swap_iocb / swap_ops rework
> for the zram swap path, but I take your point that compressed swap can
> be handled more nicely.
> 
> > Yes, we have to keep zram around as a legacy interface for now,
> > but the right place to deal with compressed swap is in the core.
> I agree compressed swap belongs in the core is better, so not only ram,
> but also the block layer can use it.
> 
> Before I rework or drop the RFC, could you outline how you see that
> core-side model working? In particular:
>   - How should a compressed backend like zram or future block device
>     plug into swap_iocb / swap_ops?
>   - What role do you expect zram to keep while the legacy block interface
>     remains: current block swap only, or something else?

Those are fantastic questions, thank you for asking them.
Can we elaborate on zram being a "legacy interface"?