From: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Support multi-order entries in the radix tree
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 13:24:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160224202406.GA13473@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1453213533-6040-1-git-send-email-matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com>
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 09:25:25AM -0500, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
>
> In order to support huge pages in the page cache, Kirill has proposed
> simply creating 512 entries. I think this runs into problems with
> fsync() tracking dirty bits in the radix tree. Ross inserts a special
> entry to represent the PMD at the index for the start of the PMD, but
> this requires probing the tree twice; once for the PTE and once for the PMD.
> When we add PUD entries, that will become three times.
>
> The approach in this patch set is to modify the radix tree to support
> multi-order entries. Pointers to internal radix tree nodes mostly do not
> have the 'indirect' bit set. I change that so they always have that bit
> set; then any pointer without the indirect bit set is a multi-order entry.
>
> If the order of the entry is a multiple of the fanout of the tree,
> then all is well. If not, it is necessary to insert alias nodes into
> the tree that point to the canonical entry. At this point, I have not
> added support for entries which are smaller than the last-level fanout of
> the tree (and I put a BUG_ON in to prevent that usage). Adding support
> would be a simple matter of one last pointer-chase when we get to the
> bottom of the tree, but I am not aware of any reason to add support for
> smaller multi-order entries at this point, so I haven't.
>
> Note that no actual users are modified at this point. I think it'd be
> mostly a matter of deleting code from the DAX fsync support at this point,
> but with that code in flux, I'm a little reluctant to add more churn
> to it. I'm also not entriely sure where Kirill is on the page-cache
> modifications; he seems to have his hands full fixing up the MM right now.
>
> Before diving into the important modifications, I add Andrew Morton's
> radix tree test harness to the tree in patches 1 & 2. It was absolutely
> invaluable in catching some of my bugs. Patches 3 & 4 are minor tweaks.
> Patches 5-7 are the interesting ones. Patch 8 we might want to leave
> out entirely or shift over to the test harness. I found it useful during
> debugging and others might too.
>
> Matthew Wilcox (8):
> radix-tree: Add an explicit include of bitops.h
> radix tree test harness
> radix-tree: Cleanups
> radix_tree: Convert some variables to unsigned types
> radix_tree: Tag all internal tree nodes as indirect pointers
> radix_tree: Loop based on shift count, not height
> radix_tree: Add support for multi-order entries
> radix_tree: Add radix_tree_dump
I like the idea of this approach - I'll work on integrating it into DAX *sync.
One quick note - some of the patches are prefixed with "radix-tree" and others
with "radix_tree".
Also, if we go through the trouble of including the radix tree test harness,
should we include a new test at the end of the series that tests out
multi-order radix tree entries?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-24 20:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-19 14:25 [PATCH 0/8] Support multi-order entries in the radix tree Matthew Wilcox
2016-01-19 14:25 ` [PATCH 1/8] radix-tree: Add an explicit include of bitops.h Matthew Wilcox
2016-01-19 14:25 ` [PATCH 2/8] radix tree test harness Matthew Wilcox
2016-01-26 23:44 ` Andrew Morton
2016-01-27 3:20 ` Matthew Wilcox
2016-01-19 14:25 ` [PATCH 3/8] radix-tree: Cleanups Matthew Wilcox
2016-01-19 14:25 ` [PATCH 4/8] radix_tree: Convert some variables to unsigned types Matthew Wilcox
2016-01-19 14:25 ` [PATCH 5/8] radix_tree: Tag all internal tree nodes as indirect pointers Matthew Wilcox
2016-01-19 14:25 ` [PATCH 6/8] radix_tree: Loop based on shift count, not height Matthew Wilcox
2016-01-19 14:25 ` [PATCH 7/8] radix_tree: Add support for multi-order entries Matthew Wilcox
2016-01-19 14:25 ` [PATCH 8/8] radix_tree: Add radix_tree_dump Matthew Wilcox
2016-01-22 0:28 ` [PATCH 0/8] Support multi-order entries in the radix tree Andrew Morton
2016-02-24 20:24 ` Ross Zwisler [this message]
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=20160224202406.GA13473@linux.intel.com \
--to=ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com \
--cc=willy@linux.intel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).