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 kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5296CC36010 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2025 16:26:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 6DEF7280002; Tue, 1 Apr 2025 12:26:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 66568280001; Tue, 1 Apr 2025 12:26:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 50741280002; Tue, 1 Apr 2025 12:26:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31887280001 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2025 12:26:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin23.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C8421603EA for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2025 16:26:49 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 83286003738.23.63AE5FB Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A39B20009 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2025 16:26:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf03.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=Fj+uYHb+; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf03.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1743524807; h=from:from:sender: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:dkim-signature; bh=LNObDbT4ATxiT4jSsqJRv32cSZfqzQ9KW0j8T6d9+NE=; b=xWjrx9UPa+EZCcoJB1+XDYai4AhEclm+B3O7DD9z6BhMdVKzX0OkZzjNyKZxsGdqAc8U2a WgNzkDWPG4hM9zTBsCfwdKqBeylXCePn/XUD4rn34rN2Jww++g7lJT2V+yQ1nR0uyUFfMM so8a19voXF2p52+LlYDiFhe0Jk+dRac= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1743524807; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=L8mPIEzv0h5P4jdSGrnXkDHFGTvgS04gIB6Mh3ukB4wxI+fkNz/nx0j9Ra7LFpWTvt0xb4 0PNmK3UnbEuYgMGlVBOHEqv8j1T3wB/rrBQ49HuBb8n1PAWN3iViiSK1JiQvLcyuL7n9np MRKPjVNj9gXd7rrvktyl7valc5w0Eao= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf03.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=Fj+uYHb+; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf03.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=LNObDbT4ATxiT4jSsqJRv32cSZfqzQ9KW0j8T6d9+NE=; b=Fj+uYHb+jju1ndZ3029s90cXHJ RjOZokodxO+o8OZVrk6AydFnf0CTEyq0g1K/rpjgoFZhSJag7dBNSYmOjwNiFay88aHcbxNSrBFDm A801t3F9NemVnDQAYUTGQ4rWAHZwebMcwF5QUbgdrEDA3HRU4iYyL4ZFQ9zm3Gc1K/51AwaGOdNUL MsJcoDB06ZRPica41iZmYHoWFNNtiPCzrCssrlP2qSN6BLfVouUhhnAmmNMjpPuQj1FIEhKTajgsN AUTE5zQGuSUNhoAiry4WwmiEATZJmbBWelTvz8jcKNCckGHwz50bGISpQaB75mzLlC3Aq/DbApwRW b7I7P7QA==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.98.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tzeRn-00000007dTF-1bdv; Tue, 01 Apr 2025 16:26:43 +0000 Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2025 17:26:43 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Thomas =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= Cc: Fan Ni , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/11] fs: Remove aops->writepage Message-ID: References: <20250307135414.2987755-1-willy@infradead.org> <20250307135414.2987755-12-willy@infradead.org> <9937a6346feccb7ab739aff63a084f63f3ad4382.camel@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <9937a6346feccb7ab739aff63a084f63f3ad4382.camel@linux.intel.com> X-Rspamd-Server: rspam07 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 3A39B20009 X-Stat-Signature: jsisdfpwq4qnnkfcqbrqsm9jqsgxy6nx X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1743524805-36902 X-HE-Meta: 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 Yeyk0Lkg QlK3Gjkf/WIOplbfECUlaW7r8CTV7+HJ45hlgxkcFv6DJ9Pup1P1hS5qNy7mTrz/Fg+Xbbm7qLUclMFzU8gRLsUTdqVBmV83i+Kg9/gi8E0We955FYYYZiGQwRr0yNKQwLzF/6yqT9zJNgNbgKu+1ORUT4HA0Tb8MW7WsHk2QEkn4tH/tBY9vTfINXDwXmNk3xKVMpj5+FzUSLYgst6+wMUvwRM7ySv9KEB0Napbv8qHsbTprfOX0xEdktIHWHQvXkx73CFWag/wc7B8zZnM5GxLSLXpJ0nW0y7TLU8FKtDpT/zKu3Yecg54fXGUZT3H7/qkt 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: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 09:10:38AM +0100, Thomas Hellström wrote: > On Mon, 2025-03-17 at 22:30 +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > This patch fixes the compilation problem.  But I don't understand why > > it's messing with the reclaim flag.  Thomas, can you explain? > > Hi, Sorry for not responding earlier. The patch that uses writepage() > here has been around for quite some time waiting for reviews / acks so > I failed to notice that it's going away. My turn to be sorry for dropping this conversation ... > Anyway the reclaim flag clearing follows that of pageout() in vmscan.c > which was also the case for the i915_gem_shmem.c usage in > __shmem_writeback(). My understanding was that if the writeback was > already completed at that point, the reclaim flag was no longer > desirable. I think the question is really why you're setting it in the first place. Setting the reclaim flag indicates that you want the folio removed from the page cache as soon as possible. Other changes in flight are about to make this more aggressive -- instead of waiting for the folio to reach the end of the writeout queue, it'll be removed upon I/O completion. It doesn't seem to me that this is what you actually want for TTM, but perhaps I've misunderstood the intent of the code.