On 09/26, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 04:01:21PM +0200, Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) wrote: > > Convert wbc_account_cgroup_owner() to take a folio instead of a page, > > and convert all callers to pass a folio directly except f2fs. > > > > Convert the page to folio for all the callers from f2fs as they were the > > only callers calling wbc_account_cgroup_owner() with a page. As f2fs is > > already in the process of converting to folios, these call sites might > > also soon be calling wbc_account_cgroup_owner() with a folio directly in > > the future. > > I was hoping for more from f2fs. I still don't have an answer from them > whether they're going to support large folios. There's all kinds of > crud already in these functions like: > > f2fs_set_bio_crypt_ctx(bio, fio->page->mapping->host, > page_folio(fio->page)->index, fio, GFP_NOIO); > > and this patch is making it worse, not better. A series of patches > which at least started to spread folios throughout f2fs would be better. > I think that struct f2fs_io_info should have its page converted to > a folio, for example. Although maybe not; perhaps this structure can > carry data which doesn't belong to a folio that came from the page cache. > It's very hard to tell because f2fs is so mind-numbingly complex and > riddled with stupid abstraction layers. Hah, I don't think it's too complex at all tho, there's a somewhat complexity to support file-based encryption, compression, and fsverity, which are useful for Android users. Well, I don't see any strong needs to support large folio, but some requests exist which was why we had to do some conversion. > > But I don't know what the f2fs maintainers have planned. And they won't > tell me despite many times of asking.
