From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, nyc@holomorphy.com,
mike.kravetz@oracle.com, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com,
hughd@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] fs: introduce ST_HUGE flag and set it to tmpfs and hugetlbfs
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 01:28:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180419082810.GA8624@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <73090d4b-6831-805b-8b9d-5dff267428d9@linux.alibaba.com>
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 11:18:25AM -0700, Yang Shi wrote:
> Yes, thanks for the suggestion. I did think about it before I went with the
> new flag. Not like hugetlb, THP will *not* guarantee huge page is used all
> the time, it may fallback to regular 4K page or may get split. I'm not sure
> how the applications use f_bsize field, it might break existing applications
> and the value might be abused by applications to have counter optimization.
> So, IMHO, a new flag may sound safer.
But st_blksize isn't the block size, that is why I suggested it. It is
the preferred I/O size, and various file systems can report way
larger values than the block size already.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-19 8:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-17 21:08 [RFC PATCH] fs: introduce ST_HUGE flag and set it to tmpfs and hugetlbfs Yang Shi
2018-04-17 21:31 ` Andrew Morton
2018-04-17 21:51 ` Yang Shi
2018-04-17 23:22 ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-04-17 23:37 ` Yang Shi
2018-04-17 23:37 ` Yang Shi
2018-04-18 10:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-04-18 18:18 ` Yang Shi
2018-04-19 8:28 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2018-04-19 9:05 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2018-04-20 0:18 ` Yang Shi
2018-04-18 20:26 ` Mike Kravetz
2018-04-18 20:53 ` Yang Shi
2018-04-19 9:01 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180419082810.GA8624@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=nyc@holomorphy.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.