From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 9 May 2001 10:23:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 9 May 2001 10:22:58 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:7692 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 9 May 2001 10:22:47 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 16:22:48 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Martin Dalecki , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Stephen C. Tweedie" , Linus Torvalds , Alexander Viro Subject: Re: blkdev in pagecache Message-ID: <20010509162248.B521@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20010509043456.A2506@athlon.random> <3AF90A3D.7DD7A605@evision-ventures.com> <20010509151612.D2506@athlon.random> <20010509161452.A521@suse.de> <20010509162009.L2506@athlon.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20010509162009.L2506@athlon.random>; from andrea@suse.de on Wed, May 09, 2001 at 04:20:09PM +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 09 2001, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 04:14:52PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > > better to stay with PAGE_CACHE_SIZE and not get into dark country :-) > > My whole point for not using PAGE_CACHE_SIZE as virtual blocksize is > that many architectures have a PAGE_CACHE_SIZE > 4k, up to 64k, on > x86-64 we may even hack a 2M PAGE_SIZE/PAGE_CACHE_SIZE mode for the > multi giga boxes. I think you agreed I'd better stay to a virtual > blocksize of 4k fixed for now. In that case, then yes leaving it as a hardcode 4k would be preferred. -- Jens Axboe