[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <672169.1597074488@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 16:48:08 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
Dave Wysochanski <dwysocha@...hat.com>,
Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...merspace.com>,
Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@...app.com>,
Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>,
Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@...il.com>,
linux-cachefs@...hat.com, linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-nfs <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
CIFS <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] fscache rewrite -- please drop for now
Steve French <smfrench@...il.com> wrote:
> cifs.ko also can set rsize quite small (even 1K for example, although
> that will be more than 10x slower than the default 4MB so hopefully no
> one is crazy enough to do that).
You can set rsize < PAGE_SIZE?
> I can't imagine an SMB3 server negotiating an rsize or wsize smaller than
> 64K in today's world (and typical is 1MB to 8MB) but the user can specify a
> much smaller rsize on mount. If 64K is an adequate minimum, we could change
> the cifs mount option parsing to require a certain minimum rsize if fscache
> is selected.
I've borrowed the 256K granule size used by various AFS implementations for
the moment. A 512-byte xattr can thus hold a bitmap covering 1G of file
space.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists