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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 569E7C432BE for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 10:18:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06EED6101A for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 10:18:19 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 06EED6101A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 9F7BD900002; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 06:18:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 9A70B6B0071; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 06:18:18 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 7FA3C900002; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 06:18:18 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0244.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.244]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D9726B006C for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 06:18:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin20.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2493D2848D for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 10:18:18 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78538604676.20.5495D8F Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by imf24.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5431B0000A0 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 10:18:17 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1630491497; h=from:from: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=pfADcfJ+X6OH5HhkKuNHIMe8xl+JwSPkUuOE45UHKJk=; b=jQ9/tBGG0UWBc1e8Wjlfvn3h9EITfwFkYGAd1yaa4QiKMHFYz3OztXnVbSqE+s7xdlUBmE X629/OEIRU2GinLOoknRzKI4ht3o+I5SXGAwPhVx86Iq7ebHpfBYeXG9tdIVLvpJOAG/7+ /jkQ6ZXd8oVW8hpKRi57+v0v4Diltnc= Received: from mail-wr1-f69.google.com (mail-wr1-f69.google.com [209.85.221.69]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-567-8fh2PZC6N2Cmwom05NpFkw-1; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 06:18:16 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 8fh2PZC6N2Cmwom05NpFkw-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f69.google.com with SMTP id h1-20020adffd41000000b0015931e17ccfso364102wrs.18 for ; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 03:18:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:cc:references:from:organization:subject :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=pfADcfJ+X6OH5HhkKuNHIMe8xl+JwSPkUuOE45UHKJk=; b=q4zVyfFVysHIxzEDlt0pTJAx4rdoBFCV6wI/H5tjHv6Ux/bG8431u3t1arEQpWkgfb y2vDdt8bNpbQrdBPQ/ULBTeRaQGlk5vMzLAsZt9r3lkSKSoR5yu3cSxtBJ0e/YzdWIjA JqEXB2vyWhbIk4R4tgF8/v8pl1Z49fAOJSnr7FPZxgd4DcAHvzWC1KpmbShvjd3oMjGh O7gjYMYKn/d8noF7hGZfBknSTjWwAmGosPGfODY7HRunB198CcWe1k1cDoQJWGwYn4M7 JY+ZUAI5EJ+HgcyfYS+wwdrYpM4EUsAQxQWoAkwHDKR87ui4nnBLBEhwtZVD/KTmg/pI I4PA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530fmGP8wusqEILONMY5rHpTHhiePIp3VXR7+Ao6mw5uUjyEpvED kouwaJLdmQbCgiTQFICVaZydhLzMyNNNvJ/b1tIF7IgvRvZMKW2Me1htiYuQv/t0GBzVaHpjEhX pz/SPA3FmCd8= X-Received: by 2002:adf:ded1:: with SMTP id i17mr36067471wrn.303.1630491495198; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 03:18:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzBQ2JXSxWqoEFQjgI3t+tVxFgFMPLx+PPKEC08FLlesLGiXIaz3K39pW+9UMEpvpCe4gfxaA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:ded1:: with SMTP id i17mr36067455wrn.303.1630491494984; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 03:18:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.3.132] (p4ff23f71.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [79.242.63.113]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b24sm4670541wmj.43.2021.09.01.03.18.13 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 01 Sep 2021 03:18:14 -0700 (PDT) To: David Howells , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner Cc: Matthew Wilcox , Theodore Ts'o , Christoph Hellwig , Alexander Viro , Vlastimil Babka , Rasmus Villemoes , "Darrick J. Wong" , Dan Williams , Jeff Layton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <3285174.1630448147@warthog.procyon.org.uk> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat Subject: Re: Folios: Can we resolve this please? Message-ID: <3c0833bd-4731-aeb2-e9d4-bd480276ae6c@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2021 12:18:13 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3285174.1630448147@warthog.procyon.org.uk> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Authentication-Results: imf24.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b="jQ9/tBGG"; spf=none (imf24.hostedemail.com: domain of david@redhat.com has no SPF policy when checking 216.205.24.124) smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=redhat.com X-Stat-Signature: 4atbor8ebair3cb4opf6rd1po78df4cf X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: B5431B0000A0 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-HE-Tag: 1630491497-148844 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: On 01.09.21 00:15, David Howells wrote: > Hi Linus, Andrew, Johannes, >=20 > Can we come to a quick resolution on folios? I'd really like this to b= e > solved in this merge window if at all possible as I (and others) have s= tuff > that will depend on and will conflict with Willy's folio work. It woul= d be > great to get this sorted one way or another. >=20 > As I see it, there are three issues, I think, and I think they kind of = go like > this: >=20 > (1) Johannes wants to get away from pages being used as the unit of m= emory > currency and thinks that folios aren't helpful in this regard[1].= There > seems to be some disagreement about where this is heading. >=20 > (2) Linus isn't entirely keen on Willy's approach[2], with a bottom u= p > approach hiding the page objects behind a new type from the pov o= f the > filesystem, but would rather see the page struct stay the main AP= I type > and the changes be hidden transparently inside of that. >=20 > I think from what Linus said, he may be in favour (if that's not = too > strong a word) of using a new type to make sure we don't miss the > necessary changes[3]. >=20 > (3) Linus isn't in favour of the name 'folio' for the new type[2]. V= arious > names have been bandied around and Linus seems okay with "pageset= "[4], > though it's already in minor(-ish) use[5][6]. Willy has an alter= nate > patchset with "folio" changed to "pageset"[7]. >=20 > With regard to (1), I think the folio concept could be used in future t= o hide > at least some of the paginess from filesystems. >=20 > With regard to (2), I think a top-down approach won't work until and un= less we > wrap all accesses to struct page by filesystems (and device drivers) in > wrapper functions - we need to stop filesystems fiddling with page inte= rnals > because what page internals may mean may change. >=20 > With regard to (3), I'm personally fine with the name "folio", as are o= ther > people[8][9][10][11], but I could also live with a conversion to "pages= et". >=20 > Is it possible to take the folios patchset as-is and just live with the= name, > or just take Willy's rename-job (although it hasn't had linux-next soak= time > yet)? Or is the approach fundamentally flawed and in need of redoing? Whatever we do, it would be great to get it out of -next one way (merge)=20 or the other (drop) ASAP, as it's a lot of code churn, affecting various=20 subsystems. But merging it in a (for some people) suboptimal state just to get it=20 out of -next might not necessarily be what we want. --=20 Thanks, David / dhildenb