From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E84FCF9C6E for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 01:39:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 3EDAA6B007B; Sun, 22 Sep 2024 21:39:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 39D766B0083; Sun, 22 Sep 2024 21:39:16 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 265606B0085; Sun, 22 Sep 2024 21:39:16 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0012.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.12]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BB706B007B for ; Sun, 22 Sep 2024 21:39:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin04.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 826AA1C687A for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 01:39:15 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82594295070.04.15010D4 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.187]) by imf01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66CA940004 for ; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 01:39:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com designates 45.249.212.187 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1727055540; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=bj69gUqZuPhMtCZ9KrG4XpMw9g8ARkXXb7YYZnx6f1IEo7fiE5jG0ObOhEnOY35hs22eeD f58ECm2HVrjmNf3sn2C4/J6GSc1qPh3sQwYhHzxVT/iKtjEtIWfKDXJmoaM7SWoEsSula8 6f+7DS3y7OXf9Dae5/5NoJHpekz6FTE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com designates 45.249.212.187 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1727055540; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=BIhiRocnqB6razLdk7B179TmdHZ+XH6hOMiq5CVvT6A=; b=eYPlWlu13sngNzzl+hNokGFm9Kd9w56Rkn7kymhZirLUcs8BFnwULpj9ElvTqfw0cGp4SL bky3WMFFXA6UpzQf12clBjGTWIKTWyHMpfx0MK3E7BKJHjfN619hewL6zL32KqipP/24XB +kNlPCUmMMeiyGigoQyId+G2JmrfjiQ= Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.174]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4XBlx61W77zyRpw; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 09:37:46 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggpemf100008.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.185.36.138]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D05F140F82; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 09:39:08 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.177.243] (10.174.177.243) by dggpemf100008.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.138) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Mon, 23 Sep 2024 09:39:07 +0800 Message-ID: <1d4f98aa-f57d-4801-8510-5c44e027c4e4@huawei.com> Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2024 09:39:07 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tmpfs: fault in smaller chunks if large folio allocation not allowed To: Matthew Wilcox CC: Andrew Morton , Hugh Dickins , Alexander Viro , Christian Brauner , Jan Kara , Anna Schumaker , , , Baolin Wang References: <20240914140613.2334139-1-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> <20240920143654.1008756-1-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Kefeng Wang In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.174.177.243] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.182) To dggpemf100008.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.138) X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: 4xqs6empcknebzy755xr36w1bp4y4cxa X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 66CA940004 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam02 X-HE-Tag: 1727055552-874106 X-HE-Meta: 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 yQOWN1ey 33d0UpKclgF6HkMUlFoVL9PAPNaCZz3dWdyHMevSHKiyQy7YyWB7SewgtSA73ITNHlxzwhofOCX0Cc49d/Al/PoHbDF6jQHT4aJBIEiVFc8/1MK+zTfkGkU0zjZeU01NHvXbr3sxyd3YqIAHM2drbopFfSsfCRFwyC48GHAFytks+e2Q= X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 2024/9/22 8:35, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 10:36:54PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: >> The tmpfs supports large folio, but there is some configurable options >> to enable/disable large folio allocation, and for huge=within_size, >> large folio only allowabled if it fully within i_size, so there is >> performance issue when perform write without large folio, the issue is >> similar to commit 4e527d5841e2 ("iomap: fault in smaller chunks for >> non-large folio mappings"). > > No. What's wrong with my earlier suggestion? > The tempfs has mount options(never/always/within_size/madvise) for large folio, also has sysfs file /sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/shmem_enabled to deny/force large folio at runtime, as replied in v1, I think it breaks the rules of mapping_set_folio_order_range(), "Do not tune it based on, eg, i_size." --- for tmpfs, it does choose large folio or not based on the i_size "Context: This should not be called while the inode is active as it is non-atomic." --- during perform write, the inode is active So this is why I don't use mapping_set_folio_order_range() here, but correct me if I am wrong.