On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 07:12:55PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 01:03:06AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > tmpfs does not set ->remount_fs() anymore and its users need
> > to be converted to new mount API.
>
> Could you explain why the devil do you bother with remount at all?
> Why not pass the right options when mounting the damn thing?
... and while we are at it, I really wonder what's going on with
that gemfs thing - among the other things, this is the only
user of shmem_file_setup_with_mnt(). Sure, you want your own
options, but that brings another question - is there any reason
for having the huge=... per-superblock rather than per-file?
After all, the readers of ->huge in mm/shmem.c are
mm/shmem.c:582: (shmem_huge == SHMEM_HUGE_FORCE || sbinfo->huge) &&
is_huge_enabled(), sbinfo is an explicit argument
mm/shmem.c:1799: switch (sbinfo->huge) {
shmem_getpage_gfp(), sbinfo comes from inode
mm/shmem.c:2113: if (SHMEM_SB(sb)->huge == SHMEM_HUGE_NEVER)
shmem_get_unmapped_area(), sb comes from file
mm/shmem.c:3531: if (sbinfo->huge)
mm/shmem.c:3532: seq_printf(seq, ",huge=%s", shmem_format_huge(sbinfo->huge));
->show_options()
mm/shmem.c:3880: switch (sbinfo->huge) {
shmem_huge_enabled(), sbinfo comes from an inode
And the only caller of is_huge_enabled() is shmem_getattr(), with sbinfo
picked from inode.
So is there any reason why the hugepage policy can't be per-file, with
the current being overridable default?
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
