On Jun 26, 2007 12:35 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > Leaving my opinion of higher order pagecache aside, this _may_ be an > example of something that doesn't need a lot of attention, because it > should be fairly uncontroversial from a filesystem's POV? (eg. it is > more a relevant item to memory management and possibly block layer). > OTOH if it is discussed in the context of "large blocks in the buffer > layer is crap because we can do it with higher order pagecache", then > that might be interesting :) FWIW, being able to have large (8-64kB) blocksize would be great for ext2/3/4. We'd sort of been betting on this by limiting the on-disk extent format to 48-bit physical block numbers, and to have 2 patches to implement this in as many weeks is excellent. To me the mechanism doesn't matter, whether through fsblock or high-order PAGE_SIZE. I'll let the rest of you duke it out as long as at least one of them makes it into the kernel. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Principal Software Engineer Cluster File Systems, Inc. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
