public inbox for linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>
To: dsterba@suse.cz, Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] btrfs: drop 2K block size support
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2026 14:21:36 +1030	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1540ebee-ba17-4901-90e8-67f66816fec6@gmx.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260304034808.GG8455@twin.jikos.cz>



在 2026/3/4 14:18, David Sterba 写道:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2026 at 02:03:43PM +1030, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>> Commit 306a75e647fe ("btrfs: allow debug builds to accept 2K block
>> size") added a new block size, 2K as the minimal block size if the
>> kernel is built with CONFIG_BTRFS_DEBUG.
>>
>> This is to allow testing subpage routines on x86_64 (page size is fixed
>> at 4K).
>>
>> But it turns out that the support is not that widely adopted, and there
>> are extra limits inside btrfs-progs, e.g. 2K node size is not supported.
>>
>> Finally with the larger data folio support already in experimental
>> builds for a while, it's very easy to trigger a large folio and testing
>> subpage routines by just doing a 64K block sized buffered write.
>>
>> Let's just remove the seldom utilized 2K block size completely.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
> 
> Can we keep it? It's under debug and not interfering with anything but
> it can trigger different set of bugs than with the large folios.
> 

Although we can, I'd say the subpage bugs will be no different between 
using large folios and real subpage cases.

I just do not want a special case hanging there without many users.

Thanks,
Qu

  reply	other threads:[~2026-03-04  3:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-02-27  3:33 [PATCH v2 0/4] btrfs: move some features out of experimental Qu Wenruo
2026-02-27  3:33 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] btrfs: drop 2K block size support Qu Wenruo
2026-03-04  3:48   ` David Sterba
2026-03-04  3:51     ` Qu Wenruo [this message]
2026-02-27  3:33 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] btrfs: move shutdown and remove_bdev callbacks out of experimental features Qu Wenruo
2026-02-27  3:33 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] btrfs: move larger data folios " Qu Wenruo
2026-03-10  6:43   ` kernel test robot
2026-03-10  7:03     ` Qu Wenruo
2026-03-10  7:21       ` Oliver Sang
2026-03-10  7:58         ` Qu Wenruo
2026-03-11 13:38           ` Oliver Sang
2026-02-27  3:33 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] btrfs: move block size < page size support " Qu Wenruo
2026-03-04  3:57 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] btrfs: move some features out of experimental David Sterba
2026-03-04  4:04   ` Qu Wenruo
2026-03-16  8:58     ` David Sterba
2026-03-16  9:16       ` Qu Wenruo

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=1540ebee-ba17-4901-90e8-67f66816fec6@gmx.com \
    --to=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com \
    --cc=dsterba@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=wqu@suse.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox