Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 13 Jul 2022 06:13:16 +0900
From:   Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@codewreck.org>
To:     Christian Schoenebeck <linux_oss@crudebyte.com>
Cc:     v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com>,
        Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@ionkov.net>,
        Nikolay Kichukov <nikolay@oldum.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/11] remove msize limit in virtio transport
Message-ID: <Ys3j7KucZGdFkttA@codewreck.org>
References: <cover.1657636554.git.linux_oss@crudebyte.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <cover.1657636554.git.linux_oss@crudebyte.com>
Precedence: bulk

Alright; anything I didn't reply to looks good to me.

Christian Schoenebeck wrote on Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 04:35:54PM +0200:
> OVERVIEW OF PATCHES:
> 
> * Patches 1..6 remove the msize limitation from the 'virtio' transport
>   (i.e. the 9p 'virtio' transport itself actually supports >4MB now, tested
>   successfully with an experimental QEMU version and some dirty 9p Linux
>   client hacks up to msize=128MB).

I have no problem with this except for the small nitpicks I gave, but
would be tempted to delay this part for one more cycle as it's really
independant -- what do you think?


> * Patch 7 limits msize for all transports to 4 MB for now as >4MB would need
>   more work on 9p client level (see commit log of patch 7 for details).
> 
> * Patches 8..11 tremendously reduce unnecessarily huge 9p message sizes and
>   therefore provide performance gain as well. So far, almost all 9p messages
>   simply allocated message buffers exactly msize large, even for messages
>   that actually just needed few bytes. So these patches make sense by
>   themselves, independent of this overall series, however for this series
>   even more, because the larger msize, the more this issue would have hurt
>   otherwise.

time-wise we're getting close to the merge window already (probably in 2
weeks), how confident are you in this?
I can take patches 8..11 in -next now and probably find some time to
test over next weekend, are we good?

-- 
Dominique