From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Carlos Maiolino <cem@kernel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Filip Blagojevic <filip.blagojevic@wdc.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: update BDI {io,ra}_pages values based on the RT device limits
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2026 17:42:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260624154241.GB13186@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ajuxIMzTbzxEuX5g@nidhogg.toxiclabs.cc>
On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 12:40:50PM +0200, Carlos Maiolino wrote:
> Giving the current tendency of filesystems being multi-device, this
> doesn't sound bad IMHO. Wouldn't accessing io_pages of each BDI also be
> worth even for a journal dev? I wonder if what you ran into wouldn't be
> possible if somebody would be using just a SSD for journal and a non-rt
> XFS on a HDD or a different/slower device.
Nothing looks at the value for the log device.
>
> I don't know how stupid that sounds but perhaps it wouldn't be that
> complicated to support multiple BDIs without making it unpleasant for
> filesystems that don't care?
> sb->bdi could be turned into a dynamic array and a new sb->s_devcount
> fields to keep track of it on multi-device filesystems. Filesystems who
> don't care about multiple BDIs would have it pointing to a single BDI
> struct. Again I feel I'm missing something, so it might sound really
> stupid :)
This will get complicated really soon..
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-24 15:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-23 14:21 update BDI {io,ra}_pages values based on the RT device limits Christoph Hellwig
2026-06-23 14:21 ` [PATCH] xfs: " Christoph Hellwig
2026-06-24 10:40 ` Carlos Maiolino
2026-06-24 15:42 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2026-06-24 12:26 ` Jan Kara
2026-06-24 13:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20260624154241.GB13186@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=cem@kernel.org \
--cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
--cc=filip.blagojevic@wdc.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.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.