[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b8f75b8e-77f5-4aa1-ce73-6c90f7d87d43@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 17:29:51 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...sung.com>,
"minchan@...nel.org" <minchan@...nel.org>,
"senozhatsky@...omium.org" <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
"axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"djwong@...nel.org" <djwong@...nel.org>,
"willy@...radead.org" <willy@...radead.org>,
"hughd@...gle.com" <hughd@...gle.com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"mcgrof@...nel.org" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Cc: "gost.dev@...sung.com" <gost.dev@...sung.com>,
Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] shmem: high order folios support in write path
On 15.09.23 11:51, Daniel Gomez wrote:
> This series add support for high order folios in shmem write
> path.
>
> This is a continuation of the shmem work from Luis here [1]
> following Matthew Wilcox's suggestion [2] regarding the path to take
> for the folio allocation order calculation.
>
> [1] RFC v2 add support for blocksize > PAGE_SIZE
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZHBowMEDfyrAAOWH@bombadil.infradead.org/T/#md3e93ab46ce2ad9254e1eb54ffe71211988b5632
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZHD9zmIeNXICDaRJ@casper.infradead.org/
>
> Patches have been tested and sent from next-230911. They do apply
> cleanly to the latest next-230914.
>
> fsx and fstests has been performed on tmpfs with noswap with the
> following results:
> - fsx: 2d test, 21,5B
> - fstests: Same result as baseline for next-230911 [3][4][5]
>
> [3] Baseline next-230911 failures are: generic/080 generic/126
> generic/193 generic/633 generic/689
> [4] fstests logs baseline: https://gitlab.com/-/snippets/3598621
> [5] fstests logs patches: https://gitlab.com/-/snippets/3598628
>
> There are at least 2 cases/topics to handle that I'd appreciate
> feedback.
> 1. With the new strategy, you might end up with a folio order matching
> HPAGE_PMD_ORDER. However, we won't respect the 'huge' flag anymore if
> THP is enabled.
> 2. When the above (1.) occurs, the code skips the huge path, so
> xa_find with hindex is skipped.
Similar to large anon folios (but different to large non-shmem folios in
the pagecache), this can result in memory waste.
We discussed that topic in the last bi-weekly mm meeting, and also how
to eventually configure that for shmem.
Refer to of a summary. [1]
[1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/4966f496-9f71-460c-b2ab-8661384ce626@arm.com
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists