Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755192AbXEDNfv (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2007 09:35:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755250AbXEDNfv (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2007 09:35:51 -0400 Received: from ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com ([166.70.28.69]:33886 "EHLO ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755192AbXEDNfu (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2007 09:35:50 -0400 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Theodore Tso Cc: Andrew Morton , David Chinner , clameter@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mel Gorman , William Lee Irwin III , Jens Axboe , Badari Pulavarty , Maxim Levitsky Subject: Re: [00/17] Large Blocksize Support V3 References: <20070424222105.883597089@sgi.com> <20070426190438.3a856220.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070427022731.GF65285596@melbourne.sgi.com> <20070426195357.597ffd7e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070427042046.GI65285596@melbourne.sgi.com> <20070426221528.655d79cb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070427060921.GA77450368@melbourne.sgi.com> <20070427000403.6013d1fa.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070427080321.GG32602149@melbourne.sgi.com> <20070427014849.41f383f7.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070427164535.GH24852@thunk.org> Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 07:33:54 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20070427164535.GH24852@thunk.org> (Theodore Tso's message of "Fri, 27 Apr 2007 12:45:35 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1693 Lines: 36 Theodore Tso writes: > On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 01:48:49AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >> And other filesystems (ie: ext4) _might_ use it. But ext4 is extent-based, >> so perhaps it's not work churning the on-disk format to get a bit of a >> boost in the block allocator. > > Well, ext3 could definitely use it; there are people using 8k and 16k > blocksizes on ia64 systems today. Those filesystems can't be mounted > on x86 or x86_64 systems because our pagesize is 4k, though. > > And I imagine that ext4 might want to use a large blocksize too --- > after all, XFS is extent based as well, and not _all_ of the > advantages of using a larger blocksize are related to brain-damaged > storage subsystems with short SG list support. Whether the advantages > offset the internal fragmentation overhead or the complexity of adding > fragments support is a different question, of course. > > So while the jury is out about how many other filesystems might use > it, I suspect it's more than you might think. At the very least, > there may be some IA64 users who might be trying to transition their > way to x86_64, and have existing filesystems using a 8k or 16k > block filesystems. :-) How much of a problem would it be if those blocks were not necessarily contiguous in RAM, but placed in normal 4K pages in the page cache? I expect meta data operations would have to be modified but that otherwise you would not care. Eric - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/