From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (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 21D7E368D5E; Wed, 24 Jun 2026 13:34:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782308083; cv=none; b=U7faW/3x0oZr7irdFMoB/GzXo6yh3XK6L6aZwC0ktP5KpbkazHDmKdsK89qpmOxOhQQehf1rBmGPlK0Raso/24FnWgZYQcB+aUX7W1kK14ycCMktlO3Tz35ofUrbqQzzu1Q34jJV2ndCuaEnagEud5kgo60QHWOiKi4YELZGabk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782308083; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ySTgdXSLxA68VjwcqL3JPNndsXFUYeV0caTDcUsSCBs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=bkEuaNgzUBD92u5aZMXq0vTHgylEipVgphbpOaqRXaCSg0Rpz07ED7Mpfgt5flm5n5mrEawuQrhfzIbNn/wQIb42EQFuld6EPgDTK36BPDQ6+nlI9MTcjfA4cFqqpRc8fKT9+/eD3YtEMbx8YaAKVVy2NSYJQoo+AndU3tIIyDo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=gct7EzQR; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="gct7EzQR" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding :Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=WnIbvnh3iSm52wFeB2rpH5sTTY+sTkta8vjSnNdSMJk=; b=gct7EzQRkOA+lmJ8C6JMtmipYW m86AxGSJHqWIFyXSiA6QvPytgC/XEKIyi0+SpxESW+nnmk7kxSYAk0t841uEhuSX6zDqOdSvQjGlG odylKrJcGOIKgguo2n9ongjsOyEWl4OItBrgl1PZ8NFzVB25Tw7ebpnCkofQrOp8DZQwOAvNt6QWF 8kPLcphVqLs9hxpanXtsKxN3qm2djkm+LK7vwOCJWFefaBx6VON/juALMmQBMuMqrrXivg7/Ow+Uv TfYQnrwYBcHfffJaH1dNz+wNTz+eQT+tPMphVYiw4R/SP9UGDWjMFYbIx1KTWtcMTujZoFUwiwmH2 s5jjBVbg==; Received: from hch by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wcNkT-00000007pWy-0VhN; Wed, 24 Jun 2026 13:34:37 +0000 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2026 06:34:37 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Salvatore Dipietro Cc: ritesh.list@gmail.com, willy@infradead.org, abuehaze@amazon.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, alisaidi@amazon.com, blakgeof@amazon.com, brauner@kernel.org, dipietro.salvatore@gmail.com, djwong@kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, vbabka@suse.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] iomap: avoid compaction for costly folio order allocation Message-ID: References: <20260527162412.19922-1-dipiets@amazon.it> <20260624080639.17100-1-dipiets@amazon.it> 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=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20260624080639.17100-1-dipiets@amazon.it> X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 08:06:36AM +0000, Salvatore Dipietro wrote: > > Hi Ritesh, Matthew, > > I wanted to kindly follow up on my summary from May 27th regarding the best path > forward for this patch. > > To recap, we benchmarked all proposed variations and shared the results: > > | Patch | Change Location | Avg TPS | % vs Baseline | > |--------------------------------|------------------------|------------|:-------------:| > | Baseline (no patch) | — | 101,979.75 | — | > | v1 (original, iomap caller) | fs/iomap/buffered-io.c | 141,194.20 | +38.45% | > | Ritesh's suggestion | mm/filemap.c | 139,200.61 | +36.50% | > | Matthew's suggestion | mm/filemap.c | 143,863.82 | +41.07% | > | kcompactd background | mm/page_alloc.c | 134,278.47 | +31.67% | > > I'd really appreciate any guidance on which direction would be acceptable for a v3 — > whether that's the page allocator approach (kcompactd background), one of the filemap.c > fixes, or something else entirely. Do you have ointers to the patches for each approach above?