On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 5:56 PM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
[off-list ref] wrote:

On 2021-01-14 17:29:37 [+0100], Vitaly Wool wrote:

quoted

On Thu, 14 Jan 2021, 17:18 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior,
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 2020-12-23 19:25:02 [+0100], Vitaly Wool wrote:

quoted

quoted

write the following patch according to your idea, what do you think ?

Yep, that is basically what I was thinking of. Some nitpicks below:

Did this go somewhere? The thread just ends here on my end.
Mike, is this patch fixing / helping your case in anyway?

Please see
* https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=160889419514019&w=2
* https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=160889418114011&w=2
* https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=160889448814057&w=2

Thank you, that would be
   1608894171-54174-1-git-send-email-tiantao6@hisilicon.com

for b4 compatibility :)

quoted

Haven't had time to test these yet but seem to be alright.

So zs_map_object() still disables preemption but the mutex part is
avoided by the patch?

Basically, yes. Minchan was very clear that he didn't want to remove
that inter-function locking, so be it.
I wouldn't really advise to use zsmalloc with zswap because zsmalloc
has no support for reclaim, nevertheless I wouldn't like this
configuration to stop working for those who are already using it.

Would you or Mike be up for testing Tian Taos's patchset?

Best regards,
   Vitaly