From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
To: Pankaj Raghav <kernel@pankajraghav.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
gost.dev@samsung.com, chandan.babu@oracle.com, mcgrof@kernel.org,
djwong@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, david@fromorbit.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/11] readahead: rework loop in page_cache_ra_unbounded()
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 11:00:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3aa8bdf1-24f6-4e1f-a5c4-8dc2d11ca292@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5e5523b1-0766-43b2-abb1-f18ea63906d6@pankajraghav.com>
On 3/26/24 10:44, Pankaj Raghav wrote:
> Hi Hannes,
>
> On 26/03/2024 10:39, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>> On 3/25/24 19:41, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 06:02:46PM +0100, Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) wrote:
>>>> @@ -239,8 +239,8 @@ void page_cache_ra_unbounded(struct readahead_control *ractl,
>>>> * not worth getting one just for that.
>>>> */
>>>> read_pages(ractl);
>>>> - ractl->_index++;
>>>> - i = ractl->_index + ractl->_nr_pages - index - 1;
>>>> + ractl->_index += folio_nr_pages(folio);
>>>> + i = ractl->_index + ractl->_nr_pages - index;
>>>> continue;
>>>> }
>>>> @@ -252,13 +252,14 @@ void page_cache_ra_unbounded(struct readahead_control *ractl,
>>>> folio_put(folio);
>>>> read_pages(ractl);
>>>> ractl->_index++;
>>>> - i = ractl->_index + ractl->_nr_pages - index - 1;
>>>> + i = ractl->_index + ractl->_nr_pages - index;
>>>> continue;
>>>> }
>>>
>>> You changed index++ in the first hunk, but not the second hunk. Is that
>>> intentional?
>>
>> Hmm. Looks you are right; it should be modified, too.
>> Will be fixing it up.
>>
> You initially had also in the second hunk:
> ractl->index += folio_nr_pages(folio);
>
> and I changed it to what it is now.
>
> The reason is in my reply to willy:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/s4jn4t4betknd3y4ltfccqxyfktzdljiz7klgbqsrccmv3rwrd@orlwjz77oyxo/
>
> Let me know if you agree with it.
>
Bah. That really is overly complicated. When we attempt a conversion
that conversion should be stand-alone, not rely on some other patch
modifications later on.
We definitely need to work on that to make it easier to review, even
without having to read the mail thread.
Cheers,
Hannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-26 10:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-13 17:02 [PATCH v3 00/11] enable bs > ps in XFS Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-13 17:02 ` [PATCH v3 01/11] mm: Support order-1 folios in the page cache Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-13 17:02 ` [PATCH v3 02/11] fs: Allow fine-grained control of folio sizes Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-25 18:29 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-03-26 8:44 ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-13 17:02 ` [PATCH v3 03/11] filemap: allocate mapping_min_order folios in the page cache Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-15 13:21 ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-13 17:02 ` [PATCH v3 04/11] readahead: rework loop in page_cache_ra_unbounded() Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-25 18:41 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-03-26 8:56 ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-26 9:39 ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-03-26 9:44 ` Pankaj Raghav
2024-03-26 10:00 ` Hannes Reinecke [this message]
2024-03-26 10:06 ` Pankaj Raghav
2024-03-26 10:55 ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-03-26 13:41 ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-26 15:11 ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-13 17:02 ` [PATCH v3 05/11] readahead: allocate folios with mapping_min_order in readahead Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-25 19:00 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-03-26 13:08 ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-04-22 11:03 ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-13 17:02 ` [PATCH v3 06/11] readahead: round up file_ra_state->ra_pages to mapping_min_nrpages Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-13 17:02 ` [PATCH v3 07/11] mm: do not split a folio if it has minimum folio order requirement Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-25 19:06 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-03-26 16:10 ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-26 16:23 ` Zi Yan
2024-03-26 16:33 ` Pankaj Raghav
2024-03-26 16:38 ` Zi Yan
2024-03-13 17:02 ` [PATCH v3 08/11] iomap: fix iomap_dio_zero() for fs bs > system page size Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-13 17:02 ` [PATCH v3 09/11] xfs: expose block size in stat Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-13 17:02 ` [PATCH v3 10/11] xfs: make the calculation generic in xfs_sb_validate_fsb_count() Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-25 19:15 ` Matthew Wilcox
2024-03-26 9:53 ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-13 17:02 ` [PATCH v3 11/11] xfs: enable block size larger than page size support Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-03-25 19:19 ` [PATCH v3 00/11] enable bs > ps in XFS Matthew Wilcox
2024-03-26 9:53 ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-03-26 15:06 ` Pankaj Raghav
2024-03-26 14:54 ` Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3aa8bdf1-24f6-4e1f-a5c4-8dc2d11ca292@suse.de \
--to=hare@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chandan.babu@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=gost.dev@samsung.com \
--cc=kernel@pankajraghav.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=p.raghav@samsung.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox