On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 06:44:00AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 11/25/18 7:17 PM, Ming Lei wrote: > > Hi, > > > > This patchset brings multi-page bvec into block layer: > > > > 1) what is multi-page bvec? > > > > Multipage bvecs means that one 'struct bio_bvec' can hold multiple pages > > which are physically contiguous instead of one single page used in linux > > kernel for long time. > > > > 2) why is multi-page bvec introduced? > > > > Kent proposed the idea[1] first. > > > > As system's RAM becomes much bigger than before, and huge page, transparent > > huge page and memory compaction are widely used, it is a bit easy now > > to see physically contiguous pages from fs in I/O. On the other hand, from > > block layer's view, it isn't necessary to store intermediate pages into bvec, > > and it is enough to just store the physicallly contiguous 'segment' in each > > io vector. > > > > Also huge pages are being brought to filesystem and swap [2][6], we can > > do IO on a hugepage each time[3], which requires that one bio can transfer > > at least one huge page one time. Turns out it isn't flexiable to change > > BIO_MAX_PAGES simply[3][5]. Multipage bvec can fit in this case very well. > > As we saw, if CONFIG_THP_SWAP is enabled, BIO_MAX_PAGES can be configured > > as much bigger, such as 512, which requires at least two 4K pages for holding > > the bvec table. > > I'm pretty happy with this patchset at this point, looks like it just > needs a respin to address the last comments. My only concern is whether I will address the last comment from Omar on patch of '[PATCH V12 01/20] btrfs: remove various bio_offset arguments', we may use the approach in V11 simply. > it's a good idea to target this for 4.21, or if we should wait until > 4.22. 4.21 has a fairly substantial amount of changes in terms of block > already, it's not the best timing for something of this magnitude too. Yeah, I understand. > > I'm going back and forth on those one a bit. Any concerns with > pushing this to 4.22? My only one concern is about the warning of "blk_cloned_rq_check_limits: over max segments limit" on dm multipath, and seems Ewan and Mike is waiting for this fix. thanks, Ming -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
