On 6/17/24 18:10, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 04:04:20PM +0000, Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) wrote:
On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 01:32:42PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
So the following can still be there from Hannes patch as we have a
stable reference:
ractl->_workingset |= folio_test_workingset(folio);
- ractl->_nr_pages++;
+ ractl->_nr_pages += folio_nr_pages(folio);
+ i += folio_nr_pages(folio);
}
We _can_, but we just allocated it, so we know what size it is already.
I'm starting to feel that Hannes' patch should be combined with this
one.
And we could even make it conditional; on recent devices allocating 64k
(or even 2M) worth of zero pages is not a big deal. And if you have
machines where this is an issue maybe using large folios isn't the best
of ideas to start with.
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Kernel Storage Architect
hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Frankenstr. 146, 90461 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), GF: I. Totev, A. McDonald, W. Knoblich
