Re: [PATCH RFC] mm: ghost swapfile support for zswap

[Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>]

On Thu, 2025-11-27 at 05:52 +0400, Chris Li wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 1:53 AM Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
> wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 2025-11-26 at 23:22 +0400, Chris Li wrote:
> > > 
> > > That being said, I think I have answered enough technical
> > > questions
> > > of
> > > my approach, to let you re-consider my proposal. You should be
> > > able
> > > to
> > > realize by now my approach is more optimal compared to VS. Do you
> > > agree or not? We are just arguing how big the gap that is.
> > > 
> > 
> > We would have much more confidence in your
> > solution if you had told us exactly how
> > you were planning to solve things in future
> > stages of the project.
> 
> Can you clarify who is "We", 

Sorry, I am talking about upstream.

When one developer has code, and somebody else emails
the equivalent of "trust me, bro", the code is usually
preferred.

> 
> Please keep in mind that I am just one person love kernel hacking and
> want to do the right things. I am doing this at my spare time, it is
> not part of my company OKR's to work on upstream swap in the last two
> years. I don't get pay to do this. I am replying this email from my
> vacation 5am in the morning.
> 
> Again, let's stay technical. If you think I am holding any secret (I
> am not ), please just ask a clarify question.

I really appreciate anybody participating in Linux
kernel development. Linux is good because different
people bring different perspectives to the table.

Some real numbers, even if just back of the envelope 
math to estimate the overhead of various ideas being
proposed, are often a good way to move a discussion 
along in a productive direction.

Let me reply to your other email with some more
technical details.

-- 
All Rights Reversed.