From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (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 558E825B677 for ; Wed, 25 Jun 2025 11:23:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.95.11.211 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750850584; cv=none; b=u4lafIwIfWuQVSZDoPafSxyFUpuyEg3xXL4klo1k4gT0sbXRNXBuck7NCSFNmXugU/NIEXR7slqjycWbylkfM2SpMLSqx67ocZpgNmvdbz04e+7bKb8QEKm+a8t2TSMeuF+El+6wwHB9P10LKlktstS/rvPImKHHm0t9HTOsDYI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750850584; c=relaxed/simple; bh=vW2dPU36DqGfzsJNQ/oTRHvh+HeKmeZzozfc5JVqLDo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=pH56tH14di52D2susnuWbPqKZMsOEH1VuuBOrGryFAhdcHWaRAIciN4zXyBpoJg3ykQq3iJzB43UJ9pp/N9Hlb78FC9TEZaLojdXGE0iKE22LpUqzdkm9/tw1f5L1/tZhwUxGS9n0iPNzuvUgiKdpCMe/FtfOLmkqg3qk4RzdaY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lst.de; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.95.11.211 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lst.de Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id C0D7C67373; Wed, 25 Jun 2025 13:22:57 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 13:22:57 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Carlos Maiolino Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Dave Chinner , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, djwong@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs: replace iclogs circular list with a list_head Message-ID: <20250625112257.GA30589@lst.de> References: <20250620070813.919516-1-cem@kernel.org> <20250620070813.919516-2-cem@kernel.org> <39xujXwbUGTy3j2E9pH6kGvaRPmJbSuo2peOANlQ21_G69mQy2f2TQX2zhXE2fEvknjHBViVbuVkacBo3jLZ1w==@protonmail.internalid> <20250624135740.GA24420@lst.de> <20250625062157.GA9641@lst.de> 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: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 10:20:35AM +0200, Carlos Maiolino wrote: > > As long as the maximum numbers > > of iclogs is relatively slow and/or the default is close to the maximum > > this seems optimal. If we every support a very huge number or default > > to something much lower than the default a separate allocation would > > be better here, but that's a trivial change. > > Well, unless we decide in the future to increase the number of iclogs, this > seems doable, and the iclogs pointers array will fit into its own cache line, > eliminating the problem pointed by Dave. Even for a modest increase of iclog that seems fine (and I think Dave at least had vague plans to increas the numbers). And if we get a huge increase we'll just switch to a dynamically allocated array, which is also trivial. > I can do the work if we agree this can be useful somehow, at this point I'm > wondering if change this will actually improve anything :/ The question of what's the point is why I gave up multiple attempts to clean this up after running into issues with my initial idea :)