From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752215AbcBVFEa (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Feb 2016 00:04:30 -0500 Received: from mail-pf0-f174.google.com ([209.85.192.174]:33103 "EHLO mail-pf0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750731AbcBVFE3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Feb 2016 00:04:29 -0500 Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:05:45 +0900 From: Sergey Senozhatsky To: Minchan Kim Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky , Sergey Senozhatsky , Andrew Morton , Joonsoo Kim , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v2 2/3] zram: use zs_get_huge_class_size_watermark() Message-ID: <20160222050545.GD11961@swordfish> References: <1456061274-20059-1-git-send-email-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> <1456061274-20059-3-git-send-email-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> <20160222000436.GA21710@bbox> <20160222004047.GA4958@swordfish> <20160222012758.GA27829@bbox> <20160222015912.GA488@swordfish> <20160222025709.GD27829@bbox> <20160222035448.GB11961@swordfish> <20160222045458.GF27829@bbox> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160222045458.GF27829@bbox> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On (02/22/16 13:54), Minchan Kim wrote: [..] > > well, at the same time zram must not dictate what to do. zram simply spoils > > zsmalloc; it does not offer guaranteed good compression, and it does not let > > zsmalloc to do it's job. zram has only excuses to be the way it is. > > the existing zram->zsmalloc dependency looks worse than zsmalloc->zram to me. > > I don't get it why you think it's zram->zsmalloc dependency. clearly 'dependency' was simply a wrong word to use, 'enforcement' or 'policy' are better choices here. but you got my point. -ss