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=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 82BF6C433EF for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 05:42:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AA9660F6B for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 05:42:22 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 1AA9660F6B 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 A3F8E6B006C; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 01:42:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 9EE8B6B0071; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 01:42:21 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 8B64F900002; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 01:42:21 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0237.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.237]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B9E96B006C for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 01:42:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin40.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 358972D39E for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 05:42:21 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78617742882.40.AF0E0B9 Received: from mail-qv1-f52.google.com (mail-qv1-f52.google.com [209.85.219.52]) by imf12.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D68FA10000A5 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 05:42:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qv1-f52.google.com with SMTP id a14so3492506qvb.6 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 22:42:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=nEUOfhmP78FxEf3QB0fKvSBV6gdVWnze8dsxjHleBkA=; b=F5aqSnSqaP1WJKXUpsns0B0iUJxeyFokn3QoLPiGMN7QDqR0Cd/HD3141M/SFBej8k 89P0smQ9LUYWd+XCl5pk9lDLFQwChFSK5JvgabIo3i+amA443hGFtTfuNVX9xApurM1z MbXOnmistIT46B9YB4ehvLe33JXPcMejYsHJyeU4h4/6sB5z0Y7JChzdvTAygzenYwci Vy+6kdJP/gRAn6vndL4rxNbl3YNL7ZRW1WGbF7ayrKREmByGFYsj5JMiC3okoxpGr5Cw lR3lvF3mpH+BlzdFflB+V+OSzsCCvWywEVTVeSgcmnihoIboqEyJvfJ7pWYjR0PXBua+ j2lw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=nEUOfhmP78FxEf3QB0fKvSBV6gdVWnze8dsxjHleBkA=; b=jnelKYnyaxR2HsSlGDIaJKTt0Ovo+6s0O9ONanwLDnG6RDpX72O5L/4tkYX9q2lVHd kvoIBTA/n2HWyzJdodjrwjU1xMKskNOqU0dTPUzC2ueNyP1Xlgh/n7NGI23PezhKLiPy b813vK5dAY+SerYaiQnHzHxY8mmtAwm335nzTpApG3ZCfVRSs7MQ5D08lzv9PFu9wRfz InpHBvUvSzdTIdIyayaidDcIVpQx3JSBXL3HBMHJuCqto4G5aWXHT61vVL94WKgzEEw/ LtrwT5ncxqwGtUntMX0saiy9nDGykHwXyX3D0cpSPCCjgGZjWz9AqydhmGrG+CLMvcS3 ANiw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531GYVkU3QkyEKDKFnMIsGIYsvmGLlVj0oXSHkRjmk+6jDHeZWDM Ye08VWomnDgLpvHIsDX5CA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwplcKSjSAbLbFDmQyYDOWb+8zCtPwiNCj+u/3MsjUpJfoRG3EP+jk64bAELpXz5Q/Xpt89Ag== X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4893:: with SMTP id bv19mr2886275qvb.6.1632375740233; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 22:42:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from moria.home.lan (c-73-219-103-14.hsd1.vt.comcast.net. [73.219.103.14]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r17sm2870821qtx.17.2021.09.22.22.42.18 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 22 Sep 2021 22:42:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 01:42:17 -0400 From: Kent Overstreet To: Johannes Weiner Cc: Linus Torvalds , Matthew Wilcox , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , "Darrick J. Wong" , Christoph Hellwig , David Howells Subject: Re: Folios for 5.15 request - Was: re: Folio discussion recap - Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Authentication-Results: imf12.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=F5aqSnSq; spf=pass (imf12.hostedemail.com: domain of kent.overstreet@gmail.com designates 209.85.219.52 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kent.overstreet@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com X-Stat-Signature: duuqoxh3aw38mexuc5xtpo5t44btpatt X-Rspamd-Server: rspam02 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: D68FA10000A5 X-HE-Tag: 1632375740-500975 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, Sep 22, 2021 at 11:08:58AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 05:22:54PM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote: > > - it's become apparent that there haven't been any real objections to the code > > that was queued up for 5.15. There _are_ very real discussions and points of > > contention still to be decided and resolved for the work beyond file backed > > pages, but those discussions were what derailed the more modest, and more > > badly needed, work that affects everyone in filesystem land > > Unfortunately, I think this is a result of me wanting to discuss a way > forward rather than a way back. > > To clarify: I do very much object to the code as currently queued up, > and not just to a vague future direction. > > The patches add and convert a lot of complicated code to provision for > a future we do not agree on. The indirections it adds, and the hybrid > state it leaves the tree in, make it directly more difficult to work > with and understand the MM code base. Stuff that isn't needed for > exposing folios to the filesystems. I think something we need is an alternate view - anon_folio, perhaps - and an idea of what that would look like. Because you've been saying you don't think file pages and anymous pages are similar enough to be the same time - so if they're not, how's the code that works on both types of pages going to change to accomadate that? Do we have if (file_folio) else if (anon_folio) both doing the same thing, but operating on different types? Some sort of subclassing going on? I was agreeing with you that slab/network pools etc. shouldn't be folios - that folios shouldn't be a replacement for compound pages. But I think we're going to need a serious alternative proposal for anonymous pages if you're still against them becoming folios, especially because according to Kirill they're already working on that (and you have to admit transhuge pages did introduce a mess that they will help with...)