On 05.07.24 11:13, Ryan Roberts wrote:
On 05/07/2024 09:59, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 05.07.24 10:45, Ryan Roberts wrote:
On 05/07/2024 06:47, Baolin Wang wrote:
On 2024/7/5 03:49, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 09:19:10PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 04.07.24 21:03, David Hildenbrand wrote:
shmem has two uses:
- MAP_ANONYMOUS | MAP_SHARED (this patch set)
- tmpfs
For the second use case we don't want controls *at all*, we want the
same heiristics used for all other filesystems to apply to tmpfs.
As discussed in the MM meeting, Hugh had a different opinion on that.
FWIW, I just recalled that I wrote a quick summary:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/f1783ff0-65bd-4b2b-8952-52b6822a0835@xxxxxxxxxx
I believe the meetings are recorded as well, but never looked at recordings.
That's not what I understood Hugh to mean. To me, it seemed that Hugh
was expressing an opinion on using shmem as shmem, not as using it as
tmpfs.
If I misunderstood Hugh, well, I still disagree. We should not have
separate controls for this. tmpfs is just not that special.
I wasn't at the meeting that's being referred to, but I thought we previously
agreed that tmpfs *is* special because in some configurations its not backed by
swap so is locked in ram?
There are multiple things to that, like:
* Machines only having limited/no swap configured
* tmpfs can be configured to never go to swap
* memfd/tmpfs files getting used purely for mmap(): there is no real
difference to MAP_ANON|MAP_SHARE besides the processes we share that
memory with.
Especially when it comes to memory waste concerns and access behavior in some
cases, tmpfs behaved much more like anonymous memory. But there are for sure
other use cases where tmpfs is not that special.
My opinion is that we need to let people configure orders (if you feel like it,
configure all), but *select* the order to allocate based on readahead
information -- in contrast to anonymous memory where we start at the highest
order and don't have readahead information available.
That approach is exactly what I proposed to start playing with yesterday [1] for
regular pagecache folio allocations too :)
In German, there is this saying "zwei Dumme ein Gedanke".
The official English alternative is "great minds think alike".
... well, the direct German->English translation definitely has a
"German touch" to it: "two stupid ones one thought"
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
