Re: [RFC 2/4] blkdev: lift BLK_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE to page cache limit

[Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>]

On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 06:58:26AM -0400, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> If the goal is to reduce DRAM costs then I recommend SSD manufacturers
> to implement zoned storage (ZNS) instead of only increasing the logical
> block size. A big advantage of zoned storage is that the DRAM cost is
> reduced significantly even if the block size is not increased.
> 
> Are there any applications that benefit from a block size larger than
> 64 KiB? If not, why to increase BLK_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE further? Do you agree
> that this question should be answered in the patch description?

Do I agree that we should use the commit message to enter into a
philosophical debate about whether ZNS or large block sizes are better?
No, I do not.  I don't even think we should have this discussion
any more on this mailing list; I think everyone is aware that both
alternatives exist.  You don't like it, and that's your prerogative.
But at some point you have to stop being an awkward cuss about it.

I think CXL is an abomination; I've made this point often enough that
everybody is aware of it.  I don't make it any more.  All I do is NACK
the inclusion of patches that are only for the benefit of CXL until
CXL has actually demonstrated its utility.