[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YXFXGeYlGFsuHz/T@moria.home.lan>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2021 08:03:37 -0400
From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: Folios for 5.15 request - Was: re: Folio discussion recap -
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 09:21:17AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 21.10.21 08:51, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > FYI, with my block and direct I/O developer hat on I really, really
> > want to have the folio for both file and anon pages. Because to make
> > the get_user_pages path a _lot_ more efficient it should store folios.
> > And to make that work I need them to work for file and anon pages
> > because for get_user_pages and related code they are treated exactly
> > the same.
++
> Thanks, I can understand that. And IMHO that would be even possible with
> split types; the function prototype will simply have to look a little
> more fancy instead of replacing "struct page" by "struct folio". :)
Possible yes, but might it be a little premature to split them?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists