On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 09:43:58PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> To avoid duplicating work with you or Christoph ... it seems like the
> plan is to kill ->writepage entirely soon, so there's no point in me
> doing a sweep of all the filesystems to convert ->writepage to
> ->write_folio, correct?
On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 11:32:06PM +0200, Andreas Grünbacher wrote:
> Am Mi., 10. Aug. 2022 um 22:57 Uhr schrieb Matthew Wilcox
> :
> > On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 11:31:50AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > XFS hasn't had a ->writepage call for a while. After LSF I internally
> > > tested
Am Mi., 10. Aug. 2022 um 22:57 Uhr schrieb Matthew Wilcox :
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 11:31:50AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > XFS hasn't had a ->writepage call for a while. After LSF I internally
> > tested dropping btrfs' callback, and the results looked good: no OOM
> > kills with
On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 11:31:50AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> XFS hasn't had a ->writepage call for a while. After LSF I internally
> tested dropping btrfs' callback, and the results looked good: no OOM
> kills with dirty/writeback pages remaining, performance parity. Then I
> went on
On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 04:11:45PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 10:22:16AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > There is some context missing because it's not clear what the full impact is
> > but it is definitly the case that writepage is ignored in some contexts for
> >
On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 10:22:16AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> There is some context missing because it's not clear what the full impact is
> but it is definitly the case that writepage is ignored in some contexts for
> common filesystems so lets assume that writepage from reclaim context always
>
On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 01:10:16PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> Hi Christoph!
>
> On Tue 19-07-22 06:13:07, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > this series removes iomap_writepage and it's callers, following what xfs
> > has been doing for a long time.
>
> So this effectively means "no writeback from page
On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 3:48 PM Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 03:18:03PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 01:10:16PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > Hi Christoph!
> > >
> > > On Tue 19-07-22 06:13:07, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > this series removes
On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 03:18:03PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 01:10:16PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Hi Christoph!
> >
> > On Tue 19-07-22 06:13:07, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > this series removes iomap_writepage and it's callers, following what xfs
> > > has been
On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 01:10:16PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> Hi Christoph!
>
> On Tue 19-07-22 06:13:07, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > this series removes iomap_writepage and it's callers, following what xfs
> > has been doing for a long time.
>
> So this effectively means "no writeback from page
Hi Christoph!
On Tue 19-07-22 06:13:07, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> this series removes iomap_writepage and it's callers, following what xfs
> has been doing for a long time.
So this effectively means "no writeback from page reclaim for these
filesystems" AFAICT (page migration of dirty pages
Hi all,
this series removes iomap_writepage and it's callers, following what xfs
has been doing for a long time.
Changes since v1:
- clean up a printk in gfs2
Diffstat:
fs/gfs2/aops.c | 26 --
fs/gfs2/log.c |5 ++---
fs/iomap/buffered-io.c | 15
12 matches
Mail list logo
