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 DA7E2C678D4 for ; Mon, 6 Mar 2023 12:04:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 465006B0072; Mon, 6 Mar 2023 07:04:06 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 415D16B0073; Mon, 6 Mar 2023 07:04:06 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 2DDDD280001; Mon, 6 Mar 2023 07:04:06 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0010.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.10]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F1416B0072 for ; Mon, 6 Mar 2023 07:04:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin29.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0510A9A35 for ; Mon, 6 Mar 2023 12:04:05 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 80538340050.29.617946B Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) by imf22.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE882C0016 for ; Mon, 6 Mar 2023 12:04:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=yvivUIiD; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=X2K10tSZ; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=suse.de; spf=pass (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of hare@suse.de designates 195.135.220.29 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=hare@suse.de ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1678104244; 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=vLNDYnpl5Xel5rnk0bBhZ9HfM1ScJkIYMJK4yAfABqI=; b=G2sftFHfVKxERFoE5cqhCFsFPBmTpHyACF7EBo4wnWgjy07Nj050vDuqhOAyO0Oog/dM48 7cGkjmlEVRo9ksWyozBXZyvm9jA9gLBbPDDRIGoZQbuJCObpoXR9BuZAB3W3gHS25wMaKD rLIlZDxbHfBlwKGNMXQFwOzarHlRXsw= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=yvivUIiD; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=X2K10tSZ; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=suse.de; spf=pass (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of hare@suse.de designates 195.135.220.29 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=hare@suse.de ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1678104244; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=D4sAr7bmOsncJxTHLwnkshxAjjvFl5i/EQSGv7ivupRPb76jieWsUVvPlR9fJygDAntulL K1zJ+U1yJxdKKf3aXFsXDCp/YoRECO+O5Q+Db5uFG56P51UI8TP4TdYLMmRJ3/T+6XPFF2 Jk/uyJK7WCnt8wxSfPTjwiCkNhQ9b0A= Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 144651FE65; Mon, 6 Mar 2023 12:04:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1678104242; h=from:from:reply-to: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; bh=vLNDYnpl5Xel5rnk0bBhZ9HfM1ScJkIYMJK4yAfABqI=; b=yvivUIiDTsVyhHd/0L1pRMpDzoB/MiI4w//DZvw3XaQAnjNopd96nix0GFWS1wimijtrv2 PQ/5m7AqEhNxv98Lfs24nNPQqmNOBtqfsZMGlpZHlxd6QXNIRJ9NSL+9xlsNh4mstUFELD A3y885Uz0pJJnV9SpkvYtkL3Imr06Gc= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1678104242; h=from:from:reply-to: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; bh=vLNDYnpl5Xel5rnk0bBhZ9HfM1ScJkIYMJK4yAfABqI=; b=X2K10tSZduj/mpNTfYMhnDz5eGDj2NQ2uEXvBz0xEZhoWHD8x/jNDOdUxjRqMSpKkP989u nNW0FZUWttCw34CQ== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0388713A66; Mon, 6 Mar 2023 12:04:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id TuQfALLWBWTkLwAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Mon, 06 Mar 2023 12:04:02 +0000 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 13:04:01 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.7.1 Subject: Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] Cloud storage optimizations Content-Language: en-US To: Luis Chamberlain , Matthew Wilcox Cc: James Bottomley , Keith Busch , Theodore Ts'o , lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org References: <2600732b9ed0ddabfda5831aff22fd7e4270e3be.camel@HansenPartnership.com> From: Hannes Reinecke In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: BE882C0016 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam09 X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: r7e4g8quuf6p3gx9psgm5uk4na3xxsfr X-HE-Tag: 1678104243-235663 X-HE-Meta: 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 afwAsm0b QPcSsleAUs87FfpUg//xn0fn9OI+znSEMShXzWQ1B+SXPoJJ67tFGthMAk6oT2w8/kncbiOhGr1OXwj1breqahklls+UXu5w4Wr0c33x91lOBMJKk5PD+zdJEpqd/RPUhDfZYS3XmRCMydmhwue8Nk/Jk3nmXB71MjcLt8U67C/CTSJZ1Bq4i+qBzAsPRxL8Cq0dQEhkWSL7Rmd7sv9hJ3j5Rbuha0LUfV+oAv/pBeTA3wyrrBYHiNlKdZ21ualzWjs693JmVD7Faol2iqehxHobbFoqVx+kDbRybts/rblSS8wBP5BJRBf5eY3Tiau6jyWmV 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 3/5/23 05:15, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > On Sat, Mar 04, 2023 at 04:39:02PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >> I'm getting more and more >> comfortable with the idea that "Linux doesn't support block sizes > >> PAGE_SIZE on 32-bit machines" is an acceptable answer. > > First of all filesystems would need to add support for a larger block > sizes > PAGE_SIZE, and that takes effort. It is also a support question > too. > > I think garnering consensus from filesystem developers we don't want > to support block sizes > PAGE_SIZE on 32-bit systems would be a good > thing to review at LSFMM or even on this list. I hightly doubt anyone > is interested in that support. > >> XFS already works with arbitrary-order folios. > > But block sizes > PAGE_SIZE is work which is still not merged. It > *can* be with time. That would allow one to muck with larger block > sizes than 4k on x86-64 for instance. Without this, you can't play > ball. > >> The only needed piece is >> specifying to the VFS that there's a minimum order for this particular >> inode, and having the VFS honour that everywhere. > > Other than the above too, don't we still also need to figure out what > fs APIs would incur larger order folios? And then what about corner cases > with the page cache? > > I was hoping some of these nooks and crannies could be explored with tmpfs. > I have just posted patchset for 'brd' to linux-block for supporting arbitrary block sizes, both physical and logical. That should be giving us a good starting point for experimenting. Cheers, Hannes