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 mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8C2EC433FE for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:24:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 618796139E for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:24:24 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 618796139E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id C76B66B0071; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 20:24:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id C25C76B0072; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 20:24:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id B15C1900002; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 20:24:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0071.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35566B0071 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 20:24:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin09.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B9408249980 for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:24:23 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78718548006.09.2189221 Received: from mail-ed1-f44.google.com (mail-ed1-f44.google.com [209.85.208.44]) by imf25.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8481B000183 for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:24:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ed1-f44.google.com with SMTP id g8so767014edb.12 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 17:24:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=5eloQCKXWTUiSmbR1X0jGe1q/eCl2wqdQA20kDdwT2s=; b=HriyKME2zazNoiZB+Rtlfps5OGDS+h+N7t3UADf3lQxb8AUY8f3zKkI8hr8iOHIA7q 3gCYNUKF8GYy9qYUjhvtgwkiYJ95UIJk2knGl+yYRnu+C6BAGWV7sizMOfbbCP75Mtcu 6ehgGtADVpi0zAE47LBah0SnJqlttdyF9UzNuVKVG+KPv1qJk1uaLe5YOEOI9RV+WIhX uhz4YudgvdCLfEVT8CAtP0J1brGnKC4nFvbpx4h6DXuHoNkJHFMo71PA/wU0z/pExdSR W8m8ltWRUW3Rb7sUxyPeBH8Ucf4WCBsAR9Zx3dI9PVdq/bWoR2Bni5zKJP5xpbqphCuj 2lbQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=5eloQCKXWTUiSmbR1X0jGe1q/eCl2wqdQA20kDdwT2s=; b=D9nkLFzzXQe8fdRx7/zk/lV/cT8f6iNbr6+0qDbnPo20SyMYQA0diziBIqhhk71Flk 5EJFA/YlKljX4TPJwY1K2ANgRtUbtU4OKSOqLdDIva9kOk7CjMIw9GsNXpeHcAxqWLMH wJXisvVX5Pehnn+r4+bksPXu3ARvAXi42f4DAR1hS/1L2rsYfBNuP+UoQSMpkNDwMDDt 0BCMQKe9EUXAWiy0W0krfLKeC9kstFNebjNBJ/KEzfSQY/mwk2E0/WyKB1TH4eCU9tMF /sZCoMtTBesyBaQ0STyZK+tbOLpJIeDeHno0YrWJi/svZhsKVyRlHzPHUI7xlV2FZz0Q nVpA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53298ppysUj/soiN9LpCbDNKMNPGxbvsahYmxnt5kfdBOI2yhqrV R0obUShA3DDgUrugmpWzrd1QPOL4z2eLaDGV/oQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz4auadneCMTX46lZNSc9u6L0br4Hz0RPmrMr25TW9yJWn3zd+4jos22jkGtsn+dhh4tVpy00ywBQs5nFwbTmg= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:1e8c:: with SMTP id f12mr2919700edf.71.1634775861767; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 17:24:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210917205731.262693-1-shy828301@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Yang Shi Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 17:24:09 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: buffer: check huge page size instead of single page for invalidatepage To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Hugh Dickins , Song Liu , Andrew Morton , Hao Sun , Linux MM , Linux FS-devel Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Song Liu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: A8481B000183 X-Stat-Signature: hq6xszrbfmmyo5e341i3aj4m4f6u7sg5 Authentication-Results: imf25.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=HriyKME2; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (imf25.hostedemail.com: domain of shy828301@gmail.com designates 209.85.208.44 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shy828301@gmail.com X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-HE-Tag: 1634775858-295295 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 Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 4:51 PM Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 04:38:49PM -0700, Yang Shi wrote: > > > However, it still doesn't make too much sense to have thp_size passed > > > to do_invalidatepage(), then have PAGE_SIZE hardcoded in a BUG > > > assertion IMHO. So it seems this patch is still useful because > > > block_invalidatepage() is called by a few filesystems as well, for > > > example, ext4. Or I'm wondering whether we should call > > > do_invalidatepage() for each subpage of THP in truncate_cleanup_page() > > > since private is for each subpage IIUC. > > > > Seems no interest? > > No. I have changes in this area as part of the folio patchset (where > we end up converting this to invalidate_folio). I'm not really > interested in doing anything before that, since this shouldn't be > reachable today. Understood. But this is definitely reachable unless Hugh's patch (skipping non-regular file) is applied. > > > Anyway the more I was staring at the code the more I thought calling > > do_invalidatepage() for each subpage made more sense. So, something > > like the below makes sense? > > Definitely not. We want to invalidate the entire folio at once. I didn't look at the folio patch (on each individual patch level), but I'm supposed it still needs to invalidate buffer for each subpage, right?