Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:8 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:8;
Message-ID: <15b067d7-8f95-d409-64be-d22359f0942a@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Sep 2023 17:43:20 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.13.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] shmem: high order folios support in write path
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc:     Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@samsung.com>,
        "minchan@kernel.org" <minchan@kernel.org>,
        "senozhatsky@chromium.org" <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
        "axboe@kernel.dk" <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        "djwong@kernel.org" <djwong@kernel.org>,
        "hughd@google.com" <hughd@google.com>,
        "akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "mcgrof@kernel.org" <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "gost.dev@samsung.com" <gost.dev@samsung.com>,
        Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>
References: <CGME20230915095123eucas1p2c23d8a8d910f5a8e9fd077dd9579ad0a@eucas1p2.samsung.com>
 <20230915095042.1320180-1-da.gomez@samsung.com>
 <b8f75b8e-77f5-4aa1-ce73-6c90f7d87d43@redhat.com>
 <ZQR5nq7mKBJKEFHL@casper.infradead.org>
 <a5c37d6e-ca0f-65cf-a264-d1220d3c3c6d@redhat.com>
 <ZQR7CyddIQQAs3yb@casper.infradead.org>
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Organization: Red Hat
In-Reply-To: <ZQR7CyddIQQAs3yb@casper.infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 15.09.23 17:40, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 05:36:27PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 15.09.23 17:34, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> No, it can't.  This patchset triggers only on write, not on read or page
>>> fault, and it's conservative, so it will only allocate folios which are
>>> entirely covered by the write.  IOW this is memory we must allocate in
>>> order to satisfy the write; we're just allocating it in larger chunks
>>> when we can.
>>
>> Oh, good! I was assuming you would eventually over-allocate on the write
>> path.
> 
> We might!  But that would be a different patchset, and it would be
> subject to its own discussion.
> 
> Something else I've been wondering about is possibly reallocating the
> pages on a write.  This would apply to both normal files and shmem.
> If you read in a file one byte at a time, then overwrite a big chunk of
> it with a large single write, that seems like a good signal that maybe
> we should manage that part of the file as a single large chunk instead
> of individual pages.  Maybe.
> 
> Lots of things for people who are obsessed with performance to play
> with ;-)

:) Absolutely. ... because if nobody will be consuming that written 
memory any time soon, it might also be the wrong place for a large/huge 
folio.

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb