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=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 C790BC2BA83 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:58:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 885FF20842 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:58:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="qQb1eqz1" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 885FF20842 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 1BDEA6B039C; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 22:58:26 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 16E656B039D; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 22:58:26 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 0ABCA6B039E; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 22:58:26 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0197.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.197]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E82486B039C for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 22:58:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin14.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DA9D246A for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:58:25 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76480117770.14.sail96_83babcd462005 X-HE-Tag: sail96_83babcd462005 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 3500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) by imf48.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:58:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=83fhIJoXHGyKFWR0u7GybPdUeA+T811CmfH2NEzMBKs=; b=qQb1eqz1vnxMwy5irhYz9tECh5 H1c/xd8lbLfnFVuL0y5zQoQEGaW1KcYvkjvwtZR7TnE2Mod+7IFSEjbpmcWTUQ2ZWGCtU789JNBVv BckOqsWP9F/S2Q/E3otdfd8pp5Ng2vxwkHxXpcTr84EDxSrfskHK/Rj3BqlWMWYFVwUGn+qUuiHuo Zvw3CIG10BrMfVVTdjMbRr7O4XNYQAPDTl3EQW6dnXmF+erO8yFnsRAQZ164bdr5DaWuqqAA+tMin nY8MULH8b3gpX49NSgYLQQW065vTn0UZYKzeJvlNAnAr3OmdfnOvYCxo2pQ4182h6SfshHGPk/BkG zJ59Pprg==; Received: from willy by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1j1jAC-0007pr-BC; Wed, 12 Feb 2020 03:58:12 +0000 Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 19:58:12 -0800 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner , Rik van Riel , linux-fsdevel , Linux-MM , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Dave Chinner , Yafang Shao , Michal Hocko , Roman Gushchin , Al Viro , kernel-team@fb.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: keep inodes with page cache off the inode shrinker LRU Message-ID: <20200212035812.GB7778@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <20200211175507.178100-1-hannes@cmpxchg.org> <29b6e848ff4ad69b55201751c9880921266ec7f4.camel@surriel.com> <20200211193101.GA178975@cmpxchg.org> <20200211154438.14ef129db412574c5576facf@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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, Feb 11, 2020 at 04:28:39PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 3:44 PM Andrew Morton wrote: > > Testing this will be a challenge, but the issue was real - a 7GB > > highmem machine isn't crazy and I expect the inode has become larger > > since those days. > > Hmm. I would say that in the intening years a 7GB highmem machine has > indeed become crazy. > > It used to be something we kind of supported. > > But we really should consider HIGHMEM to be something that is on the > deprecation list. In this day and age, there is no excuse for running > a 32-bit kernel with lots of physical memory. > > And if you really want to do that, and have some legacy hardware with > a legacy use case, maybe you should be using a legacy kernel. > > I'd personally be perfectly happy to start removing HIGHMEM support again. Do we have a use case where people want to run modern 32-bit guest kernels with more than 896MB of memory to support some horrendous legacy app? Or is our 32-bit compat story good enough that nobody actually does this? (Contrariwise, maybe those people are also fine with running a ten year old kernel because a `uname -r` starting with '3' breaks said app)