[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160321163404.GA141069@black.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 19:34:04 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] fs, mm: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and
page_cache_{get,release} macros
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 11:25:09AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2016, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>
> > PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time ago
> > with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page cache with
> > bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE.
> >
> > This promise never materialized. And unlikely will.
>
> So we decided that we are never going to put THP pages on a LRU?
Err?.. What?
We do have anon-THP pages on LRU. My huge tmpfs patchset also put
file-THPs on LRU list.
The patchset has nothing to do with THP or them being on LRU.
> Will this actually work if we have really huge memory (100s of TB) where
> almost everything is a huge page? Guess we have to use hugetlbfs and we
> need to think about this as being exempt from paging.
Sorry, I failed to understand your message.
Look on huge tmpfs patchset. It allows both small and huge pages in page
cache.
Anyway, it's out of scope of the patchset.
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists