linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>
To: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	<linux-block@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<p.raghav@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/18] mm/readahead: rework loop in page_cache_ra_unbounded()
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2023 13:56:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230920115643.ohzza3x3cpgbo54s@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230918110510.66470-2-hare@suse.de>

On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 01:04:53PM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>  		if (folio && !xa_is_value(folio)) {
> @@ -239,8 +239,8 @@ void page_cache_ra_unbounded(struct readahead_control *ractl,
>  			 * not worth getting one just for that.
>  			 */
>  			read_pages(ractl);
> -			ractl->_index++;
> -			i = ractl->_index + ractl->_nr_pages - index - 1;
> +			ractl->_index += folio_nr_pages(folio);
> +			i = ractl->_index + ractl->_nr_pages - index;
I am not entirely sure if this is correct.

The above if condition only verifies if a folio is in the page cache but
doesn't tell if it is uptodate. But we are advancing the ractl->index
past this folio irrespective of that.

Am I missing something?

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-09-20 11:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-09-18 11:04 [RFC PATCH 00/18] block: update buffer_head for Large-block I/O Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 11:04 ` [PATCH 01/18] mm/readahead: rework loop in page_cache_ra_unbounded() Hannes Reinecke
     [not found]   ` <CGME20230920115645eucas1p1c8ed9bf515c4532b3e6995f8078a863b@eucas1p1.samsung.com>
2023-09-20 11:56     ` Pankaj Raghav [this message]
2023-09-20 14:13       ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-21  9:06         ` Pankaj Raghav
2023-09-20 14:18       ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-18 11:04 ` [PATCH 02/18] fs/mpage: use blocks_per_folio instead of blocks_per_page Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 13:15   ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-18 17:45     ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 11:04 ` [PATCH 03/18] block/buffer_head: introduce block_{index_to_sector,sector_to_index} Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 16:36   ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-18 17:42     ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 21:01       ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-18 11:04 ` [PATCH 04/18] fs/buffer.c: use accessor function to translate page index to sectors Hannes Reinecke
2023-10-20 19:37   ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-10-21  5:08     ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-10-23  5:03     ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 11:04 ` [PATCH 05/18] fs/mpage: " Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 11:04 ` [PATCH 06/18] fs: Allow fine-grained control of folio sizes Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 11:04 ` [PATCH 07/18] mm/filemap: allocate folios with mapping order preference Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 13:41   ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-18 17:34     ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 11:05 ` [PATCH 08/18] mm/readahead: " Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 13:11   ` kernel test robot
2023-09-18 20:46   ` kernel test robot
2023-09-18 11:05 ` [PATCH 09/18] fs/buffer: use mapping order in grow_dev_page() Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 14:00   ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-18 17:38     ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 11:05 ` [PATCH 10/18] block/bdev: lift restrictions on supported blocksize Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 11:05 ` [PATCH 11/18] block/bdev: enable large folio support for large logical block sizes Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 11:05 ` [PATCH 12/18] brd: convert to folios Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 11:05 ` [PATCH 13/18] brd: abstract page_size conventions Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 11:05 ` [PATCH 14/18] brd: use memcpy_{to,from}_folio() Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 11:05 ` [PATCH 15/18] brd: make sector size configurable Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 11:05 ` [PATCH 16/18] brd: make logical " Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-18 11:05 ` [PATCH 17/18] xfs: remove check for block sizes smaller than PAGE_SIZE Hannes Reinecke
2023-09-20  2:13   ` Dave Chinner
2023-09-18 11:05 ` [PATCH 18/18] nvme: enable logical block size > PAGE_SIZE Hannes Reinecke

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=20230920115643.ohzza3x3cpgbo54s@localhost \
    --to=p.raghav@samsung.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hare@suse.de \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mcgrof@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).