Thread (28 messages) 28 messages, 5 authors, 2011-11-02

Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] staging: zcache: xcfmalloc support

From: Nitin Gupta <hidden>
Date: 2011-11-02 02:42:27
Also in: lkml

On 11/01/2011 02:35 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
quoted
From: Dave Hansen [mailto:dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2011 11:30 AM
To: Nitin Gupta
Cc: Seth Jennings; Greg KH; gregkh@suse.de; devel@driverdev.osuosl.org; Dan Magenheimer;
cascardo@holoscopio.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-mm@kvack.org; brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com;
rcj@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] staging: zcache: xcfmalloc support

On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 13:46 -0400, Nitin Gupta wrote:
quoted
I think replacing allocator every few weeks isn't a good idea. So, I
guess better would be to let me work for about 2 weeks and try the slab
based approach.  If nothing works out in this time, then maybe xcfmalloc
can be integrated after further testing.
Hi Nitin,

It's been about six weeks. :)

Can we talk about putting xcfmalloc() in staging now?
FWIW, given that I am quoting "code rules!" to the gods of Linux
on another lkml thread, I can hardly disagree here.

I agree with you Dan. It took me really long to bring the new allocator
into some shape and still I'm not very confident that it's ready to be
integrated with zcache.
If Nitin continues to develop his allocator and it proves
better than xcfmalloc (and especially if it can replace
zbud as well), we can consider replacing xcfmalloc later.
Until zcache is promoted from staging, I think we have
that flexibility.

Agreed.  Though I still consider slab based design much better, having
already tried xcfmalloc like design much earlier in the project history,
I would still favor xcfmalloc integration since xvmalloc weakness with
PAGE_SIZE/2 objects is probably too much to bear.
(Shameless advertisement though:  The xcfmalloc allocator
only applies to pages passed via frontswap, and on
that other lkml thread lurk many people intent on shooting
frontswap down.  So, frankly, I'd prefer time to be spent
on benchmarking zcache rather than on arguing about
allocators which, as things currently feel to me on that
other lkml thread, is not unlike rearranging deck chairs
on the Titanic. Half-:-).

Thanks,
Nitin

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help