From: Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>
To: Liu Shixin <liushixin2@huawei.com>
Cc: Seth Jennings <sjenning@redhat.com>,
Dan Streetman <ddstreet@ieee.org>,
Vitaly Wool <vitaly.wool@konsulko.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v9 0/3] Delay the initialization of zswap
Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 07:53:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZFPG3swMcHW/qxID@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9b2b6dac-9a3d-efcb-9706-44f6df1fe2bf@huawei.com>
On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 03:11:05PM +0800, Liu Shixin wrote:
> >
> > If it is the zswap_pool alone, it means that we can have a smaller patch
> > to get most of your 18M back.
> You're right, the most came from zswap_pool.
Thanks for the confirmation.
> > I also notice you move a lot of __init function back to normal functions.
> > That would mean those functions wouldn't be able to drop after the
> > initialization phase. That is another reason to move less of the initialization
> > function.
> Thanks for your advice. I've thought about it before, but I thought there is less impact
> for the size of kernel, so I didn't do it.
Let's first agree on the hypothetical patch that only delaying zswap_pool would
have the benefit over V9 on:
- smaller patch, less invasive.
- less kernel text area due to more __init function got free after initialization.
If we can reach that agreement, then we can discuss how we can get there.
I think there is a possibility that the delay initialization of zswap_pool
can fall into the "zswap_has_pool = false" case, so you don't need to have
the initialization mutex. Simpler.
I have my selfish reason as well. I have a much larger pending patch against
the zswap code so the smaller patch would mean less conflict for me.
I am guilty of giving this feedback late. If you come up with a V10, I will be glad
to review it. Or, if you prefer, I can come up with the smaller patch for you
to review as well. What do you say?
Chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-04 14:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-11 9:36 [PATCH -next v9 0/3] Delay the initialization of zswap Liu Shixin
2023-04-11 9:36 ` [PATCH -next v9 1/3] mm/zswap: remove zswap_entry_cache_{create,destroy} helper function Liu Shixin
2023-04-11 9:36 ` [PATCH -next v9 2/3] mm/zswap: replace zswap_init_{started/failed} with zswap_init_state Liu Shixin
2023-04-11 9:36 ` [PATCH -next v9 3/3] mm/zswap: delay the initialization of zswap Liu Shixin
2023-04-12 15:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-04 0:11 ` [PATCH -next v9 0/3] Delay " Chris Li
2023-05-04 7:11 ` Liu Shixin
2023-05-04 14:53 ` Chris Li [this message]
2023-05-08 1:37 ` Liu Shixin
2023-05-20 15:33 ` Chris Li
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZFPG3swMcHW/qxID@google.com \
--to=chrisl@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ddstreet@ieee.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=liushixin2@huawei.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=sjenning@redhat.com \
--cc=vitaly.wool@konsulko.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).