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

From: Dan Magenheimer
Date: Wed Feb 13 2013 - 11:56:17 EST


> From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >
> > > 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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/