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]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08FA1C44508 for ; Wed, 15 Jul 2026 14:19:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id F355B6B00AD; Wed, 15 Jul 2026 10:19:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id F0E056B00AF; Wed, 15 Jul 2026 10:19:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id E4D186B00B0; Wed, 15 Jul 2026 10:19:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0015.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.15]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C01226B00AD for ; Wed, 15 Jul 2026 10:19:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin18.hostedemail.com (lb01a-stub [10.200.18.249]) by unirelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 391521201AA for ; Wed, 15 Jul 2026 14:19:31 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 84991218942.18.A8CBAFE Received: from out-185.mta0.migadu.com (out-185.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.185]) by imf06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04A8A18000C for ; Wed, 15 Jul 2026 14:19:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf06.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=ZdJMwLJJ; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass (imf06.hostedemail.com: domain of baoquan.he@linux.dev designates 91.218.175.185 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=baoquan.he@linux.dev ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1784125169; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=4+W13oIaKJ2kJiG8pTbR7NdfVkDGpgODZQAAQ21qnls=; b=Dehc/6190dutfsz3Uv500/E8oqcuquO1mYR3F3wC+5GcBKpcUXCnK6MqpQZh2D/H7xk6Mv 2FS70YuZNeJmxh15hJfAHIBm318ehQajQAg+vCZiBNjNnroFv0qbOv3CTslcXYu8kF+VrD k/rlC/TRy0wn3DilAGP3Mhyg/etqCl4= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf06.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.s=key1 header.b=ZdJMwLJJ; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass (imf06.hostedemail.com: domain of baoquan.he@linux.dev designates 91.218.175.185 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=baoquan.he@linux.dev ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; cv=none; t=1784125169; b=5mIHJZ04VlOWke7PovXSS2xdUTUISUi2JjoUdqD1UYslJCQNVhtjumwLX+lq7Wg7Pf7pYr azcKbl5zHehNKo8Hi8Io294eYvZzmCRaMafJSOIfeCFKUHw88zxBL0Ghk7iY3uVDJvh6Wu nz7M5Pd/68R29wUMiX7lmx2/F/YGKs0= Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2026 22:19:19 +0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1784125166; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=4+W13oIaKJ2kJiG8pTbR7NdfVkDGpgODZQAAQ21qnls=; b=ZdJMwLJJSoBVXAlJ9Y0W7mljB+OphsYX2p4eS+IeHM6S3WnuUNBRPX6BBlbAwetvSY3uvF R994b0G8a0XVcEi2d9Eb4QcS4QsnckzAESWezf5bAfjB/vGZY39PoM7pTj7v8UnVTJXrZd 4gcQctPnECI4gaZUrQ73kY2SuLFpQnE= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Baoquan He To: Nhat Pham Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, chrisl@kernel.org, kasong@tencent.com, shikemeng@huaweicloud.com, baohua@kernel.org, youngjun.park@lge.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, yosry@kernel.org, chengming.zhou@linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/10] mm/swap: ghost swapfile with backend switching via Redirect entries Message-ID: References: <20260707082614.95030-1-baoquan.he@linux.dev> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-Rspamd-Server: rspam06 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 04A8A18000C X-Stat-Signature: 65n6inw6ft4fgbq8mj7zzk7bbh715f97 X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1784125168-393472 X-HE-Meta: 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 vVEGW03q dy8GClOx8CDbND+8UBB7QjzSag/t8mDiXOuZ89ybYsjyILvnp8nq/8l5EOsGL/gfX+4PE0rmJgUq4jhgSdG1ebPM9+6Ua6UnrVdVCiEqvhjegWYc5mKEDMN87PkfNhJUspUk7v+oErvPsRA+77qM7e2CozLS0xn+sLu8SGNyqVjBRjiFeXvFHJ066NtvC5tVGR6dUMvli3Qq11pELhbgghZ29l4i+UqBXnV2qlqB5qVUEOGiwZvcMIWCtHtXxw1Nj9ZN9Bak2i/v+SNdKPaWWwljToQ== Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 07/15/26 at 07:21pm, Baoquan He wrote: > Hi Nhat, > > On 07/12/26 at 05:02pm, Nhat Pham wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2026 at 4:39 AM Baoquan He wrote: > ...snip... > > Sorry, I won't reply to each comment individually. I'll just leave > a summary reply at the end. > > > > I think VSS goes beyond solving the "zswap without backing store" > > > problem — it is fundamentally an architectural restructuring of the > > > swap subsystem, with virtual swap as a first-class abstraction layered > > > above physical devices. That is both its strength (comprehensive, > > > future-proof) and its trade-off (more invasive to existing paths). > > > I respect that. > > > > > > My goal with ghost swap is different: address the immediate pain point > > > with the smallest possible change to the existing infrastructure. Both > > > approaches have value, and I hope the community discussion will help > > > identify the right balance. > > > > That's because I believe "zswap without backing store" just by itself > > is a bit narrow of a problem. It's certainly nice to fix, but it's > > more of a nuisance - you already have userspace hacks for it (as I > > mentioned above). > > > > The problem I'm trying to solve is to support: > > > > 1. Writeback. > > > > 2. Dynamicity. > > > > 3. Decoupled backends. > > > > all of which are motivated by real production issues, not some > > theoretical problems. I'm concerned that if we only focus on the third > > goal, we'll dig ourself into a hole that prevents us from solving 1 > > and 2 efficiently down the line. > > > > > > > > Thank you again for the detailed review — it has already clarified > > > which parts of the design need more thought and documentation, and will > > > make the next version stronger. > > > > I really don't want to be antagonistic, but I hope you'd take the real > > production pains that we've had (and have tried to communicate in > > multiple mailing threads, across a timeline of almost 2 years at this > > point) seriously. > > > > Collaborations should go both ways. I've gone out of my way to try to > > address the concerns of various parties, from spending *multiple > > weeks* testing and investigating performance regression on zram > > backend (which my company does not use), to a rewrite/re-design of > > virtual swap to accommodate parties who wished to opt out of virtual > > swap for now. > > > > I hope you can extend the same good will to our needs :) I've included > > you (and other swap folks such as Chris and Kairui) in my cc-lists. If > > you have concerns, you could have commented. Instead, you decided to > > send a patch series, which is basically just the ghost swapfile, with > > a bit of afterthought to handle writeback and dynamicity, rather > > inefficiently (no dedicated per-CPU caching), and not even correctly > > (the lack of rmap means swapoff / swap-cache-only physical swap slot > > reclaim is broken). > > > > I respect you and Chris very much to assume bad faith, but please work > > with me rather than against me. > > Before I get into the technical discussion, I want to address something > you raised at the end of your reply — the concern that I'm working > against you rather than with you. Our paths in MM simply haven't crossed > much until now. I can't think of reason why I would want to target you > or your work. > > I respect the work you've put into VSS. I did check it. Honestly I am not > fan of it. In your v2: 2244 insertions, 250 deletions, 15 files touched, > a new 455-line header (vswap.h). While swap subsystem has just absorbed the > swap table series. Then another 2200 lines of architectural restructuring > on top is added. Not sure if anybody raise concern about your solution, > or anybody suggests other directions. > > I posted ghost swap because I saw a concrete, narrow problem that I believed > could be solved with a small change. It makes decoupling and dynamic > growth with the minimum possible mechanism. Writeback is explicitly deferred > — not because it's unimportant, but because it's a separate problem that > shouldn't block the common case. With my shallow knowledge, it's optimal > solution to the encountered problem. If you agree, you can change to Part of above sentence is missing. I meant if you agree on the ghost solution, you can change to take its way and continue, just add me to CC. Or we can work together. > Otherwise, please continue to push virtual swap forward. I'll stop and > wait. > > Thanks > Baoquan