LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>,
	viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, nyc@holomorphy.com,
	mike.kravetz@oracle.com, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com,
	hughd@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: introduce ST_HUGE flag and set it to tmpfs and hugetlbfs
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:05:12 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180419090512.apnalks6s5z63lqq@node.shutemov.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180419082810.GA8624@infradead.org>

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 01:28:10AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 11:18:25AM -0700, Yang Shi wrote:
> > Yes, thanks for the suggestion. I did think about it before I went with the
> > new flag. Not like hugetlb, THP will *not* guarantee huge page is used all
> > the time, it may fallback to regular 4K page or may get split. I'm not sure
> > how the applications use f_bsize field, it might break existing applications
> > and the value might be abused by applications to have counter optimization.
> > So, IMHO, a new flag may sound safer.
> 
> But st_blksize isn't the block size, that is why I suggested it.  It is
> the preferred I/O size, and various file systems can report way
> larger values than the block size already.

I agree. This looks like a better fit.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov

  reply	other threads:[~2018-04-22  8:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-04-17 21:08 Yang Shi
2018-04-17 21:31 ` Andrew Morton
2018-04-17 21:51   ` Yang Shi
2018-04-17 23:22 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-04-17 23:37   ` Yang Shi
2018-04-18 10:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-04-18 18:18   ` Yang Shi
2018-04-19  8:28     ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-04-19  9:05       ` Kirill A. Shutemov [this message]
2018-04-20  0:18       ` Yang Shi
2018-04-18 20:26 ` Mike Kravetz
2018-04-18 20:53   ` Yang Shi
2018-04-19  9:01   ` Kirill A. Shutemov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180419090512.apnalks6s5z63lqq@node.shutemov.name \
    --to=kirill@shutemov.name \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
    --cc=nyc@holomorphy.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com \
    --subject='Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: introduce ST_HUGE flag and set it to tmpfs and hugetlbfs' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).