On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 07:58:17AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > Do we? btrfs by default uses a 16k nodesize (order 2 on x86), with > > a maximum of 64k (order 4). IIRC we should be able to get them pretty > > reliably. > > If it can be done as reliable as order 0 with NOFAIL, I'm totally fine with > that. I think that is the aim. I'm not entirely sure if we are entirely there yes, thus the Ccs. > > If not the best thning is to just a virtually contigous allocation as > > fallback, i.e. use vm_map_ram. > > That's also what Sweet Tea Dorminy mentioned, and I believe it's the correct > way to go (as the fallback) > > Although my concern is my lack of experience on MM code, and if those pages > can still be attached to address space (with PagePrivate set). At least they could back in the day when XFS did exactly that. In fact that was the use case why I added vmap originally back in 2002..
