From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755579AbbIYIuQ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 25 Sep 2015 04:50:16 -0400
Received: from mail-pa0-f54.google.com ([209.85.220.54]:34562 "EHLO
	mail-pa0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1755479AbbIYIuN (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 25 Sep 2015 04:50:13 -0400
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 17:50:02 +0900
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@gmail.com>
Cc: Seth Jennings <sjennings@variantweb.net>,
        Dan Streetman <ddstreet@ieee.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] zbud: allow up to PAGE_SIZE allocations
Message-ID: <20150925085002.GA17075@blaptop>
References: <20150922141733.d7d97f59f207d0655c3b881d@gmail.com>
 <20150923031845.GA31207@cerebellum.local.variantweb.net>
 <CAMJBoFOEYv05FZqDER9hw79re4vrc3wKwGeuL=uoGbCnwodH8Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150923215726.GA17171@cerebellum.local.variantweb.net>
 <20150925021325.GA16431@bbox>
 <CAMJBoFMDaUv2+V8jQra+HNYBLDZq_B22aqYkjigYJ=V00Z+k4A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150925084617.GA23340@blaptop>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150925084617.GA23340@blaptop>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 05:47:13PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 10:17:54AM +0200, Vitaly Wool wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > I already said questions, opinion and concerns but anything is not clear
> > > until now. Only clear thing I could hear is just "compaction stats are
> > > better" which is not enough for me. Sorry.
> > >
> > > 1) https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/15/33
> > > 2) https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/21/2
> > 
> > Could you please stop perverting the facts, I did answer to that:
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/21/753.
> > 
> > Apart from that, an opinion is not necessarily something I would
> > answer. Concerns about zsmalloc are not in the scope of this patch's
> > discussion. If you have any concerns regarding this particular patch,
> > please let us know.
> 
> Yes, I don't want to interrupt zbud thing which is Seth should maintain
> and I respect his decision but the reason I nacked is you said this patch
> aims for supporing zbud into zsmalloc for determinism.
                               zram

Sorry for the typo.