From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756552AbbGFN5f (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2015 09:57:35 -0400 Received: from mail-pd0-f172.google.com ([209.85.192.172]:34915 "EHLO mail-pd0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755612AbbGFN5d (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jul 2015 09:57:33 -0400 Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 22:56:46 +0900 From: Sergey Senozhatsky To: Minchan Kim Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] zsmalloc/zram: store compaction stats in zspool Message-ID: <20150706135646.GD663@swordfish> References: <1436185070-1940-1-git-send-email-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> <1436185070-1940-6-git-send-email-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> <20150706132728.GB16529@blaptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150706132728.GB16529@blaptop> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23+89 (0255b37be491) (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On (07/06/15 22:27), Minchan Kim wrote: > > `zs_compact_control' accounts the number of migrated objects but > > it has a limited lifespan -- we lose it as soon as zs_compaction() > > returns back to zram. It was fine, because (a) zram had it's own > > counter of migrated objects and (b) only zram could trigger > > compaction. However, this does not work for automatic pool > > compaction (not issued by zram). To account objects migrated > > during auto-compaction (issued by the shrinker) we need to store > > this number in zs_pool. > > > > A new zsmalloc zs_get_num_migrated() symbol exports zs_pool's > > ->num_migrated counter, so we better start using it, rather than > > continue keeping zram's own `num_migrated' copy in zram_stats. > > If we introduce like this API we should make new another API when > we want to introduce new stats. So I don't think it's a good idea. > How about this? > > void zsmalloc_stats(struct zsmalloc_stats *stats); > > So, we could return any upcoming stats without new API introduce. > Hm, agree. Do you prefer me to fold this into this patch set or to do as a separate work later? P.S. Sorry. Seems that my git send-email has some problems, so group-reply in mutt does not work as expected. -ss