Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs+bounces-3457-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 07:14:32 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com>,
	Anna Schumaker <anna@kernel.org>, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: support large folios for NFS
Message-ID: <20240529051432.GA15188@lst.de>
References: <20240527163616.1135968-1-hch@lst.de> <ZlZHNsejJkJNhKHR@casper.infradead.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZlZHNsejJkJNhKHR@casper.infradead.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)

On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 10:05:58PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 06:36:07PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > this series adds large folio support to NFS, and almost doubles the
> > buffered write throughput from the previous bottleneck of ~2.5GB/s
> > (just like for other file systems).
> > 
> > The first patch is an old one from willy that I've updated very slightly.
> > Note that this update now requires the mapping_max_folio_size helper
> > merged into Linus' tree only a few minutes ago.
> 
> Kind of surprised this didn't fall over given the bugs I just sent a
> patch for ... misinterpreting the folio indices seems like it should
> have caused a failure in _some_ fstest.

I've run quite few tests with different NFS protocol versions, and there
were no new failures, and the existing one is a MM one also reproducible
with local XFS.  That's indeed a bit odd.