[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YC/k7YhZNxO7O5PF@mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 11:18:53 -0500
From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To: Alexey Lyashkov <alexey.lyashkov@...il.com>
Cc: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>,
Artem Blagodarenko <artem.blagodarenko@...il.com>,
linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mmp: do not use O_DIRECT when working with regular
file
Alexey,
It'd be helpful to me to understand _why_ this use case is important
for your workloads. O_DIRECT support is rarely used as far as I know,
and fs blocksize != page size is rare as well. The main use cases I
know of fs blocksize != page size is on architectures (not terribly
common) with 16k or 64k page sizes, that want to use 4k file system
blocksizes for interoperability reasons.
(And I suppose because mke2fs uses a 4k block size by default. Perhaps
we should change this so that the default is that mke2fs will use a
block size == page size, unless for some reason the page size is not
one supported by ext4 (although I'm not aware of any architecture
wanting page sizes > 64k), or the user explicitly specifies the block
size using "mke2fs -b".)
Are you trying to make O_DIRECT support in e2fsprogs a first class
reason out of completeness concern? Or is this a use case which is
important in production workloads that you are familiar with?
Thanks,
- Ted
Powered by blists - more mailing lists