Re: [PATCH 0/3] compressed in-memory swapping take5

[Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>]

On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Nitin Gupta wrote:
>
>> Justification for this custom allocator is present in xvmalloc changelog
>> itself. It gives reason for not using SLUB and SLOB. During review
>> cycle, I never got any arguments against that justification.
>
> The use of highmem is pretty unique. But that restrict the usefulness to
> 32 bit processors with too much RAM.
>
>

I would again like to mention that apart from highmem, xvmalloc is O(1)
and is very memory efficient too. Sometime in future I hope to present
it as replacement for funny SLOB allocator. For this I will require lot of
data which is another major work....

For now, I will rename xvmalloc to rzmalloc and move it to
drivers/block/ramzswap. As for data to justify ramzswap inclusion
-- its going to be hard. It just 'feels' lot more responsive with compression
but not sure how to quantify this. Maybe I will get some data
by next release.

Thanks to you all for your reviews and suggestions.

Nitin