On 5/31/24 11:04, Byungchul Park wrote: ... > I don't believe you do not agree with the concept itself. Thing is > the current version is not good enough. I will do my best by doing > what I can do. More performance is good. I agree with that. But it has to be weighed against the risk and the complexity. The more I look at this approach, the more I think this is not a good trade off. There's a lot of risk and a lot of complexity and we haven't seen the full complexity picture. The gaps are being fixed by adding complexity in new subsystems (the VFS in this case). There are going to be winners and losers, and this version for example makes file writes lose performance. Just to be crystal clear: I disagree with the concept of leaving stale TLB entries in place in an attempt to gain performance.
