From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Daniel Rosenberg <drosen@google.com>
Cc: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>,
kernel-team@android.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 0/1] Add 16K Support for f2fs
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2023 19:34:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230816023417.GA899@sol.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230816011432.1966838-1-drosen@google.com>
On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 06:14:31PM -0700, Daniel Rosenberg via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:
> F2fs filesystems currently have two large restrictions around block size.
> The block size must equal the page size, and the block size must be 4096.
>
> The following patch, along with the associated f2fs-tools patch set, relax the
> latter restriction, allowing you to use 16K block size f2fs on a 16K page size
> system. It does not allow mounting 4K block size f2fs on a 16k page system.
>
> Doing that would require a lot more work, requiring a refactor of all block
> sized struct similar to the userspace patches, as well as handling the block
> reading/writing at sub page boundaries. As far as I know, buffer_heads are
> still the main way this is handled in other filesystems. Is there a different
> option there? I know there's a general desire to move away from buffer_heads,
> but I don't know of any replacements covering that use case. And it would feel
> a bit silly to not be able to read older filesystems from a 16k system...
iomap is the replacement for buffer heads. See https://lwn.net/Articles/935934
- Eric
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Daniel Rosenberg <drosen@google.com>
Cc: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>,
kernel-team@android.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] Add 16K Support for f2fs
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2023 19:34:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230816023417.GA899@sol.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230816011432.1966838-1-drosen@google.com>
On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 06:14:31PM -0700, Daniel Rosenberg via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:
> F2fs filesystems currently have two large restrictions around block size.
> The block size must equal the page size, and the block size must be 4096.
>
> The following patch, along with the associated f2fs-tools patch set, relax the
> latter restriction, allowing you to use 16K block size f2fs on a 16K page size
> system. It does not allow mounting 4K block size f2fs on a 16k page system.
>
> Doing that would require a lot more work, requiring a refactor of all block
> sized struct similar to the userspace patches, as well as handling the block
> reading/writing at sub page boundaries. As far as I know, buffer_heads are
> still the main way this is handled in other filesystems. Is there a different
> option there? I know there's a general desire to move away from buffer_heads,
> but I don't know of any replacements covering that use case. And it would feel
> a bit silly to not be able to read older filesystems from a 16k system...
iomap is the replacement for buffer heads. See https://lwn.net/Articles/935934
- Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-16 2:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-16 1:14 [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 0/1] Add 16K Support for f2fs Daniel Rosenberg via Linux-f2fs-devel
2023-08-16 1:14 ` Daniel Rosenberg
2023-08-16 1:14 ` [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/1] ANDROID: f2fs: Support Block Size == Page Size Daniel Rosenberg via Linux-f2fs-devel
2023-08-16 1:14 ` Daniel Rosenberg
2023-08-16 4:11 ` [f2fs-dev] " kernel test robot
2023-08-16 4:11 ` kernel test robot
2023-08-16 2:34 ` Eric Biggers [this message]
2023-08-16 2:34 ` [PATCH 0/1] Add 16K Support for f2fs Eric Biggers
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=20230816023417.GA899@sol.localdomain \
--to=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=drosen@google.com \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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.