From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC0AE30EF84; Mon, 27 Oct 2025 16:06:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761581210; cv=none; b=mq/PtHIGd36ePvuqcPz3Yl0EJXMa1pq0REqizw0yV18JQjuAvBisvsFwuNFw4ALf5HBU2nRAOec+FkzcQsHy1Oks68oP28p6HTMSNXvEvZTdg7ELnWqcAfQ1UL5BshK12eQM/nesbvQugmyXWPCehCQCctnWhc5M61axl8jZzZo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761581210; c=relaxed/simple; bh=lgYGdJqJLSXnsekhf4n7haNtiB25n4IV3mTGIwEdIt0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=XBnODvn+VofiHhFXvU31zomc1ZHWEQeCPjzxqktyS7IYy97kx3BIdF0aTL6nqKG2pDIN08mFwDJHCdkZ9M1E4lMUODC8hoAK0V0a8XfMBpKTw1pRKQlo4IWF+I0SVHhz55I87s1tZBMP8Dehmak9MZWaJo0795j+44XvLo+0/4c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=BtLEgncf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="BtLEgncf" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 23D84C4CEF1; Mon, 27 Oct 2025 16:06:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1761581210; bh=lgYGdJqJLSXnsekhf4n7haNtiB25n4IV3mTGIwEdIt0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=BtLEgncf3+Nx2+/q5LePpZKjn73XUJB/FjnjW8HOPme7rRrIUzbkPoZ9yLit4Xdd6 1th/Izvrun+V9r9cyFF2FlcbICtJKaG7RzQ4ySXdiKJ0f+BrpN9c0DmY0cFNsethnt cdyTZ4OMaCzePVC69gtUtKBPD12NlwU2AB/Xoy51tq8Il91BP9lhqFAok/9W2zvVWJ NZ4g22e8RDxsHWMXBgWXmPN6PT9kHcGH9sNxc443NtmfgHkcK5kK/BwM3lywrlVfzC dR1hJ6hqKugOAnPoiTvkuXKy6Xx2ZYi4tCp7OGoNfX+KysZvHF1SvCGQlKhMyvcFdd M1GxuWkiW9oxw== Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 06:06:49 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: jinji zhong Cc: minchan@kernel.org, senozhatsky@chromium.org, philipp.reisner@linbit.com, lars.ellenberg@linbit.com, christoph.boehmwalder@linbit.com, corbet@lwn.net, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mkoutny@suse.com, axboe@kernel.dk, mhocko@kernel.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev, shakeel.butt@linux.dev, akpm@linux-foundation.org, terrelln@fb.com, dsterba@suse.com, muchun.song@linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, zhongjinji@honor.com, liulu.liu@honor.com, feng.han@honor.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Introduce per-cgroup compression priority Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Hello, On Sun, Oct 26, 2025 at 01:05:07AM +0000, jinji zhong wrote: > This patch introduces a per-cgroup compression priority mechanism, > where different compression priorities map to different algorithms. > This allows administrators to select appropriate compression > algorithms on a per-cgroup basis. I don't think it makes sense to tie this to cgroups. Is there something preventing this from following the process hierarchy? Thanks. -- tejun