From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750838AbZINEE2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 00:04:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750702AbZINEE1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 00:04:27 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f184.google.com ([209.85.222.184]:36493 "EHLO mail-pz0-f184.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750696AbZINEE0 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 00:04:26 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <200909100215.36350.ngupta@vflare.org> <200909100332.55910.ngupta@vflare.org> <4AAB065D.3070602@vflare.org> Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:34:29 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] compcache: in-memory compressed swapping v2 From: Nitin Gupta To: Hugh Dickins Cc: Andrew Morton , Ed Tomlinson , Pekka Enberg , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-mm-cc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Sat, 12 Sep 2009, Nitin Gupta wrote: >> On 09/10/2009 03:32 AM, Nitin Gupta wrote: >> > Project home: http://compcache.googlecode.com/ >> > >> > * Changelog: v2 vs initial revision >> >   - Use 'struct page' instead of 32-bit PFNs in ramzswap driver and >> >   xvmalloc. >> >     This is to make these 64-bit safe. >> >   - xvmalloc is no longer a separate module and does not export any symbols. >> >     Its compiled directly with ramzswap block driver. This is to avoid any >> >     last bit of confusion with any other allocator. >> >   - set_swap_free_notify() now accepts block_device as parameter instead of >> >     swp_entry_t (interface cleanup). >> >   - Fix: Make sure ramzswap disksize matches usable pages in backing swap >> >   file. >> >     This caused initialization error in case backing swap file had >> >     intra-page >> >     fragmentation. >> >> Can anyone please review these patches for possible inclusion in 2.6.32? > > Sorry, I certainly wouldn't be able to review them for 2.6.32 myself. > > Since we're already in the merge window, and this work has not yet > had exposure in mmotm (preferably) or linux-next, I really doubt > anyone should be pushing it for 2.6.32. > > I'd be quite glad to see it and experiment with it in mmotm, > so it could go into 2.6.33 if all okay.  And I now fully accept > that the discard/trim situation is so hazy that you are quite > right to be asking for your own well-defined notifier instead. > > But I'm not going to pretend to have reviewed it. > Thanks for the pointer Hugh -- I will try to post patches against mmotm later. Nitin