RE: [PATCH] staging/zcache: Fix/improve zcache writeback code, tie to a config option

From: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com, minchan@kernel.org,
	Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	devel@linuxdriverproject.org, ngupta@vflare.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH] staging/zcache: Fix/improve zcache writeback code, tie to a config option
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 08:55:29 -0800 (PST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <694a9284-7d41-48c6-a55b-634fb2912f43@default> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130211214944.GA22090@kroah.com>

> From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh@linuxfoundation.org]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging/zcache: Fix/improve zcache writeback code, tie to a config option
> 
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 01:43:58PM -0800, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > > From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh@linuxfoundation.org]
> >
> > > So, how about this, please draw up a specific plan for how you are going
> > > to get this code out of drivers/staging/  I want to see the steps
> > > involved, who is going to be doing the work, and who you are going to
> > > have to get to agree with your changes to make it happen.
> > >  :
> > > Yeah, a plan, I know it goes against normal kernel development
> > > procedures, but hey, we're in our early 20's now, it's about time we
> > > started getting responsible.
> >
> > Hi Greg --
> >
> > I'm a big fan of planning, though a wise boss once told me:
> > "Plans fail... planning succeeds".
> >
> > So here's the plan I've been basically trying to pursue since about
> > ten months ago, ignoring the diversion due to "zcache1 vs zcache2"
> > from last summer.  There is no new functionality on this plan
> > other than as necessary from feedback obtained at or prior to
> > LSF/MM in April 2012.
> >
> > Hope this meets your needs, and feedback welcome!
> > Dan
> >
> > =======
> >
> > ** ZCACHE PLAN FOR PROMOTION FROM STAGING **
> >
> > PLAN STEPS

<snip>

> Thanks so much for this, this looks great.
> 
> So, according to your plan, I shouldn't have rejected those patches,
> right?  :)
> 
> If so, please resend them in the next day or so, so that they can get
> into 3.9, and then you can move on to the next steps of what you need to
> do here.

I see it is now in linux-next.  Thanks very much!

For completeness, I thought I should add some planning items
that ARE new functionality.  In my opinion, these can wait
until after promotion, but mm developers may have different
opinions:

ZCACHE FUTURE NEW FUNCTIONALITY

A. Support zsmalloc as an alternative high-density allocator
B. Support zero-filled pages more efficiently
C. Possibly support three zbuds per pageframe when space allows