On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 11:14:52AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > Hello, > > On (04/26/17 09:52), js1...@gmail.com wrote: > [..] > > ret = scnprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, > > - "%8llu %8llu %8llu %8lu %8ld %8llu %8lu\n", > > + "%8llu %8llu %8llu %8lu %8ld %8llu %8lu %8llu %8llu\n", > > orig_size << PAGE_SHIFT, > > (u64)atomic64_read(&zram->stats.compr_data_size), > > mem_used << PAGE_SHIFT, > > zram->limit_pages << PAGE_SHIFT, > > max_used << PAGE_SHIFT, > > (u64)atomic64_read(&zram->stats.same_pages), > > - pool_stats.pages_compacted); > > + pool_stats.pages_compacted, > > + zram_dedup_dup_size(zram), > > + zram_dedup_meta_size(zram)); > > hm... should't we subtract zram_dedup_dup_size(zram) from > ->stats.compr_data_size? we don't use extra memory for dedupped > pages. or don't inc ->stats.compr_data_size for dedupped pages?
Hmm... My intention is to keep previous stat as much as possible. User can just notice the saving by only checking mem_used. However, it's also odd that compr_data_size doesn't show actual compressed data size. Minchan, what do you think about it? Thanks.
