From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752930AbbEFFBZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 May 2015 01:01:25 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f46.google.com ([209.85.220.46]:32823 "EHLO mail-pa0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751447AbbEFFBY (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 May 2015 01:01:24 -0400 Date: Wed, 6 May 2015 14:01:15 +0900 From: Minchan Kim To: Sergey Senozhatsky Cc: Andrew Morton , Nitin Gupta , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sergey Senozhatsky Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 00/10] add on-demand device creation Message-ID: <20150506050114.GA29132@blaptop> References: <1430743142-15854-1-git-send-email-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1430743142-15854-1-git-send-email-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello Sergey, On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 09:38:52PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > We currently don't support zram on-demand device creation. The only way > to have N zram devices is to specify num_devices module parameter (default > value 1). That means that if, for some reason, at some point, user wants > to have N + 1 devies he/she must umount all the existing devices, unload > the module, load the module passing num_devices equals to N + 1. > > This patchset introduces zram-control sysfs class, which has two sysfs > attrs: > > - zram_add -- add a new zram device > - zram_remove -- remove a specific (device_id) zram device > > Usage example: > # add a new specific zram device > cat /sys/class/zram-control/zram_add > 1 > > # remove a specific zram device > echo 4 > /sys/class/zram-control/zram_remove I just reported bug. Please handle it. Other nits: 1) How about inserting a step to reset before zram_remove? IOW, user should echo "1" > /sys/block/zram[0-9]*/reset before echo zram_id > /sys/class/zram-control/zram_remove. Actually, I can't think any benefit other than consistency of zram interface but you might have. 2) How about using hot_add/hot_remove? /class/zram-control includes prefix zram meaning so I think we don't need zram prefix of the knobs. Instead, let's add *hot* which is more straightforward for representing *dynamic*. What do you think about it? -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim