From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 816BCC433EF for ; Tue, 31 May 2022 16:39:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 07D3A6B007B; Tue, 31 May 2022 12:39:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 0281B6B007E; Tue, 31 May 2022 12:39:32 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id E5A856B0082; Tue, 31 May 2022 12:39:32 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0011.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.11]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D640E6B007B for ; Tue, 31 May 2022 12:39:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin23.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay11.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2C4F8046F for ; Tue, 31 May 2022 16:39:32 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79526598984.23.F6D52E4 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [145.40.68.75]) by imf04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F8854005D for ; Tue, 31 May 2022 16:39:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66A4EB815D8; Tue, 31 May 2022 16:39:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D87B9C385A9; Tue, 31 May 2022 16:39:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linux-foundation.org; s=korg; t=1654015169; bh=A/DHL/tNx0HHEWTdHtaMQABpN/kFJ14iw7pqcuvysUM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=nFYoRZeVc5MGDgAeAunzGOeED0NPZTkckOgSemM9vpUjLxbU01GPCuod8QAKc92Mo Wy2+FFdCxZ3ojIQxaHGqfd07nBzIiTMyd5gXa+AmyTFFidn3tb+mEfskdK8R7i8PCN JO98Kmzd+xho+J1qVGiQGQytm66aGgcraYoFngiE= Date: Tue, 31 May 2022 09:39:27 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Diederik de Haas Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 970639@bugs.debian.org, Seth Jennings , Dan Streetman , Vitaly Wool Subject: Re: ZSWAP still considered experimental? Message-Id: <20220531093927.2292b3defaf9b8cf431ca369@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <10087857.nUPlyArG6x@bagend> References: <10087857.nUPlyArG6x@bagend> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Authentication-Results: imf04.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux-foundation.org header.s=korg header.b=nFYoRZeV; dmarc=none; spf=pass (imf04.hostedemail.com: domain of akpm@linux-foundation.org designates 145.40.68.75 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=akpm@linux-foundation.org X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 5F8854005D X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: jpcczd7hnn6618i5ozacc5bm3yzyh3ip X-HE-Tag: 1654015153-830551 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, 31 May 2022 10:41:05 +0200 Diederik de Haas wrote: > In https://bugs.debian.org/970639 the request was made to enable ZSWAP. > > Upon it was (rightly) noted that zswap.rst contained this: > > Zswap is a new feature as of v3.11 and interacts heavily with memory > > reclaim. This interaction has not been fully explored on the large set > > of potential configurations and workloads that exist. For this reason, > > zswap is a work in progress and should be considered experimental. > > Furthermore the mm/Kconfig contains this on the ZSWAP option: > > Compressed cache for swap pages (EXPERIMENTAL) > > But the contents of that zswap.rst hasn't changed since the initial commit > 61b0d76017a50c263c303fa263b295b04e0c68f6 from 2013-07-11. > > Similarly, that line in Kconfig hasn't changed either since the initial commit > 2b2811178e85553405b86e3fe78357b9b95889ce from 2013-07-11. > > Should ZSWAP should still be considered experimental or not? I'd say "not".