Hello Andrew,
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 04:07:00PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 14:03:51 +0900 Minchan Kim wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 07:42:56PM +0100, Luis Henriques wrote:
> > > When the user supplies an unsupported compression algorithm, keep the
> > > previously
On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 14:03:51 +0900 Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 07:42:56PM +0100, Luis Henriques wrote:
> > When the user supplies an unsupported compression algorithm, keep the
> > previously selected one (knowingly supported) or the default one (if the
> > compression algorithm
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 02:33:19PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On (09/10/15 14:03), Minchan Kim wrote:
> [..]
> >
> > I guess most of scripts have checked result of his doing so if we
> > removes it, it will break them.
>
> to be honest, we never documented or required any of th
Hello,
On (09/10/15 14:03), Minchan Kim wrote:
[..]
>
> I guess most of scripts have checked result of his doing so if we
> removes it, it will break them.
to be honest, we never documented or required any of those. the only source
of information for the user space -- zram.txt documentation -- si
On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 07:42:56PM +0100, Luis Henriques wrote:
> When the user supplies an unsupported compression algorithm, keep the
> previously selected one (knowingly supported) or the default one (if the
> compression algorithm hasn't been changed yet).
>
> Note that previously this operati
On (09/08/15 19:42), Luis Henriques wrote:
>
> Note that previously this operation (i.e. setting an invalid algorithm)
> would result in no algorithm being selected, which means that this
> represents a small change in the default behaviour.
>
previously it would result in guaranteed to fail
6 matches
Mail list logo
