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=-9.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL 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 F095DC33CA2 for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 11:24:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B568E206DB for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 11:24:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="BfSBKC9u" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B568E206DB Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 2D48F8E0006; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 06:24:47 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 25EE78E0001; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 06:24:47 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 1267D8E0006; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 06:24:47 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0082.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.82]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC6588E0001 for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 06:24:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin03.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B6169180AD806 for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 11:24:46 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76354234572.03.week99_63e1659bf3d09 X-HE-Tag: week99_63e1659bf3d09 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4859 Received: from mail-oi1-f196.google.com (mail-oi1-f196.google.com [209.85.167.196]) by imf30.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 11:24:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oi1-f196.google.com with SMTP id 13so419691oij.13 for ; Wed, 08 Jan 2020 03:24:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references :user-agent:mime-version; bh=QFQ9MzNR3N8+jCKSFbC/snv1ofUy7bS229pDEsG4jtU=; b=BfSBKC9urrCfL+mnO1wDRiAIf3kvrUAK0zCMfKv3A2Nivl2OaQw1dNxFOIBX86ylrP rYgOOTUO/HQDnD/zc1XkjpuUASqyWQI9CzirZWviiktrYETdU6r8etl0Y0yxJGsSviuU wEv2TR39OsGQRTp/K2XmYVevlUrZnvFmRFVreWJzXgegipHdKA0P+N4yFTPhBxkxC02D M8s5WP2PPW04v+VK8lSTJQEU55xtHHLdyNrniaRMQ4K9BbYSHtJXAHHsiCfaJ3cElKzJ 9i0vt0PDlUiG9abu4hOGc/li01v0s9DqA8NBYZ9ycI3KftuOhCcz/h7nGEj14pX8YSu7 76EQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version; bh=QFQ9MzNR3N8+jCKSFbC/snv1ofUy7bS229pDEsG4jtU=; b=EnMy/l8uKxsCodCJQuobET+odLYwE+ZcYIOe/2LQIoXqXBRfNkaJFNy5StOpAd+yby LTnv68EbtsliU0J11Z6WGQ0vYvdEL46K5Gc6nidC8clGjjrejczA9/feQlP0MmFKyVd1 3ErT8wg4jEfySvTZhNrhEkZfvCqRROrrwDx0TkLohVHIxRzq1iUmTz7rkRUmgXal4OHl CShp2YXjoBMPNNAkWbHcbx9ND1lckjfUCf2/DrY5y7NoNjuhNcHy3bj99kQtZnWc47eV VOD+5GmIhKhdFVUfv/VfiHwY3TUDAX5DtW7ZjOMhTDhhI8DN3dYxJAULbCmO1a9m838+ XgxQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXSLDHIZyX0+dnTutlyxwe9Db8e0fc1IH2fHwl9vTE6mzeRPzW8 XJveWcc62G34b8+9MFslFYIMmg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzOWV+sbUpUBdYUxYwIk/nJwIoBL6vcjOmXeYbyU08FMkPZ2OYEZkrYkv7PKP8zAf5XscqRDw== X-Received: by 2002:aca:ab0e:: with SMTP id u14mr2709116oie.1.1578482685125; Wed, 08 Jan 2020 03:24:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from eggly.attlocal.net (172-10-233-147.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net. [172.10.233.147]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a74sm1002436oii.37.2020.01.08.03.24.43 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 08 Jan 2020 03:24:44 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 03:24:42 -0800 (PST) From: Hugh Dickins X-X-Sender: hugh@eggly.anvils To: Chris Mason cc: Dave Chinner , Amir Goldstein , Hugh Dickins , Chris Down , Linux MM , Andrew Morton , Al Viro , Matthew Wilcox , Jeff Layton , Johannes Weiner , Tejun Heo , linux-fsdevel , linux-kernel , Kernel Team Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] tmpfs: Support 64-bit inums per-sb In-Reply-To: <4E9DF932-C46C-4331-B88D-6928D63B8267@fb.com> Message-ID: References: <20200107001039.GM23195@dread.disaster.area> <20200107001643.GA485121@chrisdown.name> <20200107003944.GN23195@dread.disaster.area> <20200107210715.GQ23195@dread.disaster.area> <4E9DF932-C46C-4331-B88D-6928D63B8267@fb.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (LSU 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII 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 Tue, 7 Jan 2020, Chris Mason wrote: > On 7 Jan 2020, at 16:07, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > IOWs, there are *lots* of 64bit inode numbers out there on XFS > > filesystems.... > > It's less likely in btrfs but +1 to all of Dave's comments. I'm happy > to run a scan on machines in the fleet and see how many have 64 bit > inodes (either buttery or x-y), but it's going to be a lot. Dave, Amir, Chris, many thanks for the info you've filled in - and absolutely no need to run any scan on your fleet for this, I think we can be confident that even if fb had some 15-year-old tool in use on its fleet of 2GB-file filesystems, it would not be the one to insist on a kernel revert of 64-bit tmpfs inos. The picture looks clear now: while ChrisD does need to hold on to his config option and inode32/inode64 mount option patch, it is much better left out of the kernel until (very unlikely) proved necessary. Thanks, Hugh