[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aW48fk0IVus32QtW@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026 14:15:26 +0000
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Zhiguo Zhou <zhiguo.zhou@...el.com>
Cc: Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, david@...nel.org,
gang.deng@...el.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, mhocko@...e.com, muchun.song@...ux.dev,
osalvador@...e.de, rppt@...nel.org, surenb@...gle.com,
tianyou.li@...el.com, tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com, vbabka@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mm/readahead: batch folio insertion to improve
performance
On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 06:02:57PM +0800, Zhiguo Zhou wrote:
> This patch series improves readahead performance by batching folio
> insertions into the page cache's xarray, reducing the cacheline transfers,
> and optimizing the execution efficiency in the critical section.
1. Don't resend patches immediately. Wait for feedback.
2. Don't send v2 as a reply to v1. New thread.
3. This is unutterably ugly.
4. Passing boolean parameters to functions is an antipattern. You
never know at the caller site what 'true' or 'false' means.
5. Passing 'is_locked' is specifically an antipattern of its own.
6. You've EXPORTed a symbol that has no in-tree modular user.
7. Do you want to keep trying to do this or do you want me to do it
properly? I don't have much patience for doing development by patch
feedback, not for something as sensitive as the page cache.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists