On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 05:13:55PM -0700, Joanne Koong wrote: > Introduce the capability to dynamically configure the FUSE_MAX_MAX_PAGES > limit through a sysctl. This enhancement allows system administrators to > adjust the value based on system-specific requirements. > > This removes the previous static limit of 256 max pages, which limits > the max write size of a request to 1 MiB (on 4096 pagesize systems). > Having the ability to up the max write size beyond 1 MiB allows for the > perf improvements detailed in this thread [1]. > > $ sysctl -a | grep fuse_max_max_pages > fs.fuse.fuse_max_max_pages = 256 > > $ sysctl -n fs.fuse.fuse_max_max_pages > 256 > > $ echo 1024 | sudo tee /proc/sys/fs/fuse/fuse_max_max_pages > 1024 > > $ sysctl -n fs.fuse.fuse_max_max_pages > 1024 > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20240124070512.52207-1-jefflexu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u > > Signed-off-by: Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@xxxxxxxxx> Overall the change is great, and I see why you named it the way you did, but I think may be 'fuse_max_pages_limit' may be a better name? The original constant name wasn't great, but it was fine in its context. I think having it as an interface we should name it something less silly. I'm not married to this thought, what do the rest of you think? Whatever name we settle on is fine, you can add Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> once we settle on the right name for this. Thanks, Josef
