On Thu, 2023-03-09 at 10:23 -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > > This is not to say I think larger block sizes is in any way a bad > > idea ... I just think that given the history, it will be driven by > > application needs rather than what the manufacturers tell us. > > I think it would be beneficial for Linux to support filesystem blocks > larger than the page size. Based on experience outlined above, I am > not convinced larger logical block sizes will get much traction. But > that doesn't prevent devices from advertising larger > physical/minimum/optimal I/O sizes and for us to handle those more > gracefully than we currently do. Right, I was wondering if we could try to persuade the Manufacturers to advertise a more meaningful optimal I/O size ... But as you say, the pressure is coming from applications and filesystems for larger block sizes and that will create I/O patterns that are more beneficial to the underlying device hardware regardless of whether it actually tells us anything about what it would like. James
