From: Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@gmail.com>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@redhat.com>,
Dan Streetman <ddstreet@ieee.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] z3fold: the 3-fold allocator for compressed pages
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 17:01:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMJBoFN7ZFnz9-mG4Vn=Sd-p-bCdnC_H30br=JANMsoWM5Eayw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <571DC72F.3030503@suse.cz>
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 9:28 AM, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> wrote:
> On 04/22/2016 01:22 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
<snip>
>>
>> So... why don't we just replace zbud with z3fold? (Update the changelog
>> to answer this rather obvious question, please!)
>
>
> There was discussion between Seth and Vitaly on v1. Without me knowing the
> details myself, it looked like Seth's objections were addressed, but then
> the thread died. I think there should first be a more clear answer from Seth
> whether z3fold really looks like a clear win (i.e. not workload-dependent)
> over zbud, in which case zbud could be extended?
I have tried to address this question in the changelog for v3 which came out
today. Basically I'd like to play on the safe side and have z3fold
co-existing with
zbud for a while, since zbud is a simple and proven solution which has less
object code and can work without ZPOOL. The original zbud implementation
doesn't use struct page's fields in any way, which z3fold can't get
away without.
As a matter of fact, I don't think there's much of the similar code left between
zbud and z3fold, other than the generic structure.
~vitaly
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-25 15:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-19 9:48 [PATCH v2] z3fold: the 3-fold allocator for compressed pages Vitaly Wool
2016-04-21 23:22 ` Andrew Morton
2016-04-25 7:28 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-04-25 14:54 ` Seth Jennings
2016-04-25 15:01 ` Vitaly Wool [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAMJBoFN7ZFnz9-mG4Vn=Sd-p-bCdnC_H30br=JANMsoWM5Eayw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=vitalywool@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ddstreet@ieee.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=sjenning@redhat.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).