From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Luis Henriques <luis.henriques@canonical.com>,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] zram: introduce comp algorithm fallback functionality
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:29:28 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150915232928.GA18206@bbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150915160700.3556a32f450a3319750c4271@linux-foundation.org>
Hello Andrew,
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 04:07:00PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 14:03:51 +0900 Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 07:42:56PM +0100, Luis Henriques wrote:
> > > When the user supplies an unsupported compression algorithm, keep the
> > > previously selected one (knowingly supported) or the default one (if the
> > > compression algorithm hasn't been changed yet).
> > >
> > > Note that previously this operation (i.e. setting an invalid algorithm)
> > > would result in no algorithm being selected, which means that this
> > > represents a small change in the default behaviour.
> >
> > It seems it is hard for Andrew to parse so I will add more.
>
> Thanks ;)
>
> What's missing here is an understandable-by-andrew *reason* for the
> patch. What's wrong with the old behaviour and why is the new
> behaviour better?
Oops, I said it in detail but it seems I got failed.
For initializing zram, we need to set up 3 optional parameters in advance.
1. the number of compression streams
2. memory limitation
3. compression alrogithm
Although user pass completely wrong value to set up for 1 and 2 parameters,
it's okay because they have default value so zram will be initialized
with the default value(Of course, when user pass wrong value via *echo*,
sysfs returns -EINVAL so user can notice it).
But 3 is not consistent with other optional parameters.
IOW, If user pass wrong value to set up 3 parameter, zram's initialization
would be failed unlike other optional parameters.
So, this patch make them consistent.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-15 23:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-08 18:42 [PATCH v2] zram: introduce comp algorithm fallback functionality Luis Henriques
2015-09-09 0:45 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-09-10 5:03 ` Minchan Kim
2015-09-10 5:33 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2015-09-10 5:58 ` Minchan Kim
2015-09-15 23:07 ` Andrew Morton
2015-09-15 23:29 ` Minchan Kim [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=20150915232928.GA18206@bbox \
--to=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luis.henriques@canonical.com \
--cc=ngupta@vflare.org \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com \
/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