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 mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EEC4C433F5 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 04:28:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE7E26113D for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 04:28:41 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org DE7E26113D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 0CE92900002; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 00:28:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 07E026B0072; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 00:28:41 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id E8845900002; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 00:28:40 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0204.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.204]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D92696B0071 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 00:28:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin39.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B71D180AD81D for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 04:28:40 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78715534800.39.FC0D8FE Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88C527001A24 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 04:28:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.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=b+qTJxNsHthexDLm6qY3jEJp4Sy4sxKMBU1dqyGdWI0=; b=RefDNgpJldhRgveeNjD/KqFwYa 2OTYXNNgh7YDgxaFWRaWfskXqejipz+nAe/tvmqNDO9vX48rL6iodwhqNQWK3JUb+TGlUPoMAoT+b bQ5SG7AHMPKImbY0/tW2B/S7X3atqlaV2vaKSwLNuBoy93xXAVBOxR9Lk2dXphElKKuvXzOYd7k5a +Ouizj7gA3hxSEz60Mb3I2C13WGjhjBR4nkrgY+tAMOirFZL0ryolBRgCd47JgInMYc3/YyT9y81s FoMGX4NzCG8P2+wnqnhXnjfxIQEFWMopixCm+hTSOauJSwlfS55entvwdrR9JtpgK6pSgiaR3iq4n 8nlDtrpA==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1md28Y-00CD8L-KF; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 03:19:42 +0000 Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 04:19:30 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Johannes Weiner Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Kent Overstreet , Linus Torvalds , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , "Darrick J. Wong" , Christoph Hellwig , David Howells , Hugh Dickins Subject: Re: Folios for 5.15 request - Was: re: Folio discussion recap - Message-ID: References: <20211018231627.kqrnalsi74bgpoxu@box.shutemov.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam06 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 88C527001A24 Authentication-Results: imf02.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=RefDNgpJ; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf02.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org X-Stat-Signature: 847xs4rheq15pkr9pp9j6pgqdb6qekh3 X-HE-Tag: 1634704117-52166 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, Oct 19, 2021 at 11:16:18AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > My only effort from the start has been working out unanswered > questions in this proposal: Are compound pages the reliable, scalable, > and memory-efficient way to do bigger page sizes? What's the scope of > remaining tailpages where typesafety will continue to lack? How do we > implement code and properties shared by folios and non-folio types > (like mmap/fault code for folio and network and driver pages)? I don't think those questions need to be answered before proceeding with this patchset. They're interesting questions, to be sure, but to a large extent they're orthogonal to the changes here. I look forward to continuing to work on those problems while filesystems and the VFS continue to be converted to use folios. > I'm not really sure how to exit this. The reasons for my NAK are still > there. But I will no longer argue or stand in the way of the patches. Thank you. I appreciate that.