From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Erik Jensen <erikjensen@rkjnsn.net>
Cc: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: page->index limitation on 32bit system?
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 23:22:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210220232224.GF2858050@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b3e40749-a30d-521a-904f-8182c6d0e258@rkjnsn.net>
On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 03:02:26PM -0800, Erik Jensen wrote:
> On 2/18/21 5:39 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 08:42:14PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > BTW, what would be the extra cost by converting page::index to u64?
> > > I know tons of printk() would cause warning, but most 64bit systems
> > > should not be affected anyway.
> >
> > No effect for 64-bit systems, other than the churn.
> >
> > For 32-bit systems, it'd have some pretty horrible overhead. You don't
> > just have to touch the page cache, you have to convert the XArray.
> > It's doable (I mean, it's been done), but it's very costly for all the
> > 32-bit systems which don't use a humongous filesystem. And we could
> > minimise that overhead with a typedef, but then the source code gets
> > harder to work with.
>
> Out of curiosity, would it be at all feasible to use 64-bits for the page
> offset *without* changing XArray, perhaps by indexing by the lower 32-bits,
> and evicting the page that's there if the top bits don't match (vaguely like
> how the CPU cache works)? Or, if there are cases where a page can't be
> evicted (I don't know if this can ever happen), use chaining?
>
> I would expect index contention to be extremely uncommon, and it could only
> happen for inodes larger than 16 TiB, which can't be used at all today. I
> don't know how many data structures store page offsets today, but it seems
> like this should significantly reduce the performance impact versus upping
> XArray to 64-bit indexes.
Again, you're asking for significant development work for a dying
platform.
Did you try the bootlin patch?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-20 23:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-18 8:54 page->index limitation on 32bit system? Qu Wenruo
2021-02-18 12:15 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-02-18 12:42 ` Qu Wenruo
2021-02-18 13:39 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-02-19 0:37 ` Qu Wenruo
2021-02-19 16:12 ` Theodore Ts'o
2021-02-19 23:10 ` Qu Wenruo
2021-02-20 0:23 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-02-22 0:19 ` Dave Chinner
2021-02-20 2:20 ` Erik Jensen
2021-02-20 3:40 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-02-20 23:02 ` Erik Jensen
2021-02-20 23:22 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2021-02-21 0:01 ` Erik Jensen
2021-02-21 17:15 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-02-18 21:27 ` Erik Jensen
2021-02-19 14:22 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-02-19 17:51 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-02-19 23:13 ` Qu Wenruo
2021-02-22 1:48 ` Dave Chinner
2021-03-01 1:49 ` GWB
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210220232224.GF2858050@casper.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=erikjensen@rkjnsn.net \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.