On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 05:50:44PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 03:23:39PM +0000, Daniel Gomez wrote: > > I have the same patch for shmem and large folios tree. That was the last piece > > needed for getting better performance results. However, it is also needed to > > support folios in the write_begin() and write_end() callbacks. > > I don't think it's *needed*. It's nice! But clearly not necessary > since Christoph made nfs work without doing that. I see. We send anyway the length with bytes and the folio allocated inside write_begin() is retrieved with folio_page(). I did test this patch (+mapping_max_folio_size() patch) for shmem an it works fine for me. > > > In order to avoid > > making them local to shmem, how should we do the transition to folios in these > > 2 callbacks? I was looking into aops->read_folio approach but what do you think? > > See the v2 of buffer_write_operations that I just posted. I was waiting > for feedback from Christoph on the revised method for passing fsdata > around, but I may as well just post a v2 and see what happens. Interesting. I think it makes sense to convert tmpfs to buffered_write_operations as well. Can you add me to the v2 so I can add/review it for tmpfs? Thanks
