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 3CE631EB26; Mon, 22 Jul 2024 18:49:47 +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=1721674188; cv=none; b=mf6KTMMru+KoBhrdBWLKFKKKfrhWG7JQ2jthrCHnHWipfmnw6uclPvt8KnNaVQZ74GYN01nLxoK86DqJO25kf2Tp5O+x0V6JS7FhzM96I2juqLXw60TbO0v8ti60B14/bAw+j3blzjj3ZzKu5/zGw6pS2GRZQgKysbMgv6AghdM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721674188; c=relaxed/simple; bh=hn2upQiYP7UVVh8YpM8DoUA/iiPMNNLXkyFWhtd6TGw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=K4tftU+MkGRenaTl/3WkfckGvUabqA72JBWLj3Cu4MTT9rIm8OGGnvsK5kgeKaUZ84IRNXtyX/THhvISC8EZSo3a2IidSFnpXIzUg12s/x5/acVKdLZfqgxB0v1DUiBqbBKhy+v4ggav6W6y5mAnILQD+90/rhOqDx3pCooEb2k= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=IBms8LWs; 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="IBms8LWs" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C150FC116B1; Mon, 22 Jul 2024 18:49:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1721674187; bh=hn2upQiYP7UVVh8YpM8DoUA/iiPMNNLXkyFWhtd6TGw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=IBms8LWs1INJ8qU8LQbNwfD24Z1JMH2ALkqUiz1+amOducuM+VnOFlLxwg4sSu3U+ XAibCPEgvlACgIljS48g6I++6RFK+HTnm32dmMc2SAxs7M7mgMkse7vfyb61ZTX6cr zTAMengMyghWkM8APV0aumjr4Pyom8l/9PmMPZDcxfZ1WLpLAuuhEBRxl2RT4Tz/mt /C+JeFVPa1x/DwJHd110I5P/944BxoevH2giXoQGAfnNGRwi6SvyOhlP8144j1iGb4 +Pq44mn9lLHInUC0ZEyG80RDIPJ34u2NNRxB82IV6hTA4NONZN7mp3xxDhxM2y4RPE AjDMvrh0QZirw== Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2024 11:49:47 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: "Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)" Cc: david@fromorbit.com, willy@infradead.org, chandan.babu@oracle.com, brauner@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yang@os.amperecomputing.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, john.g.garry@oracle.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, hare@suse.de, p.raghav@samsung.com, mcgrof@kernel.org, gost.dev@samsung.com, cl@os.amperecomputing.com, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, ryan.roberts@arm.com, hch@lst.de, Zi Yan Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 10/10] xfs: enable block size larger than page size support Message-ID: <20240722184947.GJ103014@frogsfrogsfrogs> References: <20240715094457.452836-1-kernel@pankajraghav.com> <20240715094457.452836-11-kernel@pankajraghav.com> <20240715164632.GV612460@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20240722141220.yfxb7jder7mqwgod@quentin> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@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: <20240722141220.yfxb7jder7mqwgod@quentin> On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 02:12:20PM +0000, Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) wrote: > > > + > > > + if (mp->m_sb.sb_blocksize > max_folio_size) { > > > + xfs_warn(mp, > > > +"block size (%u bytes) not supported; maximum folio size supported in "\ > > > +"the page cache is (%ld bytes). Check MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER (%d)", > > > + mp->m_sb.sb_blocksize, max_folio_size, > > > + MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER); > > > + error = -ENOSYS; > > > + goto out_free_sb; > > > > Nit: Continuation lines should be indented, not lined up with the next > > statement: > > > > xfs_warn(mp, > > "block size (%u bytes) not supported; maximum folio size supported in "\ > > "the page cache is (%ld bytes). Check MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER (%d)", > > mp->m_sb.sb_blocksize, > > max_folio_size, > > MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER); > > error = -ENOSYS; > > goto out_free_sb; > > @Darrick: As willy pointed out, the error message is a bit long here. > Can we make as follows: > > "block size (%u bytes) not supported; Only block size (%ld) or less is supported "\ > mp->m_sb.sb_blocksize, > max_folio_size); > > This is similar to the previous error and it is more concise IMO. Ah, ok. I suppose printing max_folio_size *and* MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER is redundant. The shortened version above is ok by me. --D > > > > With that fixed, > > Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong > > > > --D > > >