From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5019361654 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2026 21:36:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771882581; cv=none; b=vF/CH26jNZU2tcvjJDe3I1ykIleCiQkyb93KB/MroSdmw5KQqVPbFgPaJu5ZpfedboRs8sgEx8/UbgG9rkXstkF1ZANJCOmW3b0Oi56ThLcbThnym+qU+WQCL4QXrGEjCoA1ZFaVMnpscYOcabqbUugyq1DvQT+pgom9xDoqOLQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771882581; c=relaxed/simple; bh=dgBlKs1JJdh5wlt3u1oPFVnvLe8Pn4zy18/qDggH1kc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=r22fNfkWuUOtUYgPh5JCCt+7AIJcUq9V1PzFEf95eVr3fQ+9bVnpicS4hQMO2FOZagvKk6B8pVYI0671JAXns2R7xuRkB5C2c/7hxgisAr/vWTzOaLVXWYa3SvtOAJ22j+BPiRiMcDt4AHbQqRx85WocOMicA4E+2psjV3qtJ1I= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=gwriYbY3; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="gwriYbY3" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 24AA0C116C6; Mon, 23 Feb 2026 21:36:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1771882580; bh=dgBlKs1JJdh5wlt3u1oPFVnvLe8Pn4zy18/qDggH1kc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=gwriYbY34PdQllaZjFMusa/FgHO/fWbcHL72EWWy4o3MnvQNN7lRreFJvwTehR0ds w+jTUsl4N+v3bMGhDJmeDmL7meTJxtieloW0EDrmyepfkkFyOaRg7wFWWKpy6dNc9n vOER6OqEjdcbHEpYAQMakoh7UzaBL2NAmsYKHp6ZKJmo2cS6bu54FvKoalJo2WJQBC yUs1gUJGNRAum6owpPmnOUau/VXi+uXvvFNOTqwbvl0ylXJlACodcN2ZQCJwfU2lb4 ltQUlSNIOZXCHGuPTYVmxHozsTMd/GjZ6A66B5jYJJx9arnt9Ip7R9hkhLhTbfqI4H W2f1eZqJH1Tew== Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2026 21:36:18 +0000 From: Jaegeuk Kim To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Nanzhe Zhao , lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com, Chao Yu , Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>, wqu@suse.com Subject: Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] Large folio support: iomap framework changes versus filesystem-specific implementations Message-ID: References: <75f43184.d57.19c7b2269dd.Coremail.nzzhao@126.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On 02/20, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 07:48:39AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Maybe you catch on the wrong foot, but this pisses me off. I've been > > telling you guys to please actually fricking try converting f2fs to > > iomap, and it's been constantly ignored. > > Christoph isn't alone here. There's a consistent pattern of f2fs going > off and doing weird shit without talking to anyone else. A good start > would be f2fs maintainers actually coming to LSFMM, but a lot more design > decisions need to be cc'd to linux-fsdevel. What's the benefit of supporting the large folio on the write path? And, which other designs are you talking about? I'm also getting the consistent pattern: 1) posting patches in f2fs for production, 2) requested to post patches modifying the generic layer, 3) posting the converted patches after heavy tests, 4) sitting there for months without progress. E.g., https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20251202013212.964298-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org/