From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ej1-f46.google.com (mail-ej1-f46.google.com [209.85.218.46]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B40B140E5F for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2026 01:06:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=pass smtp.client-ip=209.85.218.46 ARC-Seal:i=2; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783386375; cv=pass; b=B9FR7aJgZTypUgYruQFzCXO542yCM/YZ0OPKkVeH75dj9fcDs0b07ICm3iGikiHEqwsixpy+ebLVDJsZNM9RFrKx7VKr8Ve72F+/q6u+J6bJoscPn/8fJuzoUpy1mWm2ogq1VwmPTDYVTkUXEbUuY6qiy7tx5Boqj09a10/32Xg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=2; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783386375; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1cVUMFMBeoUz0Y8dmZcg+CAn0nZ3hquYpnV4AN1MMHM=; h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=pQznANfWhSd0xC/nQzDk3MuJO8fGgxvhh0NbEqdEregH4q4SxR4ZaxmNOUom+SZa/0JMBLNZcf+ji9inyfSRdVGNxGzNmFH/2OGJnwHvAo9owmWgUgNZsV90JCM4kYiZsrf5bZj3wzMnH3W8NFkpStSRgQXGisfpiIsR6pZlGZY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=2; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=BANOuUAI; arc=pass smtp.client-ip=209.85.218.46 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="BANOuUAI" Received: by mail-ej1-f46.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-c12614b81c9so624609866b.3 for ; Mon, 06 Jul 2026 18:06:14 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1783386373; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20260327; b=UWB/c3NeTDmkI6EO+XbGDnekRoqRJq1H/HGWnKN7vbzCemifiZ/T+3vHP+SGIs65K+ fmkFPezzXFOBboyLeuyL0zu6QkDceDcdpKl1y1Zj+oE0o66FIX5UQ354nEHGJrklESdS XjAPrjByXg0kKolZUsYrVnq7+aYdsAycg8oM/vFJEZ8hcw0pf1ngbw1KGeuEtqGvLRh1 97o8r4sujKjnzhKIJ7v7isLC9zge2TaohJ9A6OsAOJ/9g4bFqMzKoYgGTpRfOyTwHDMD mV0OPQE/mOSapfUHkBzqynl0RptHBvkToXEUseHaSBXbnBZBtuKsJtXAbkD9+YaKQtzK xgig== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20260327; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=e0WA+1xWMmwxJhQG3lcP+OMC81WDVxu32cEwJ7yzLdU=; fh=rF3DY2do4tDx47iukU9sByzKtVt8uAf+1IOH5mVadng=; b=G4qUfs2FwKMLJSXj1bTDQ8dntalNJ0AjSD6ORJtS7ggjyT9LzshjO/a/f9CLFIB8Xk zPC3dVPoN/L25KR1C+QnHus87lhU90Nn1tM56p1SRxGdQk/Wq9eu66gZfw6d+eNwnPUd ySRf5Rkjv4S73+hz+Rg2pW4fexuhwGaoJryKyXjce8EcmwDm5eJFxcBjujWu/vqn/ZVG MIZ4Fma9ExU0xYrK3Ubc7ujB3GEmsNG8eeMrAW6+Wz4GGB5O8uzFsGoQdKrraWOU1yUK 7EWJBv2hSzEVomQuLWoqi4ZjMdQ+RTmtABRtdomS/zfC2C0k9VhyRN6ZCdjL2iVvcHCN aCEA==; darn=vger.kernel.org ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1783386373; x=1783991173; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=e0WA+1xWMmwxJhQG3lcP+OMC81WDVxu32cEwJ7yzLdU=; b=BANOuUAIXh0wEwFJ190NYWVKiiudeeVuwHrZrZyjj5hhHBbwPKPMB2FI0dK4Xsr7vo PdRqJp3/OjG0/fuu1A+aqCXJSkTrh5KGGso1//+hTSug/cscGSYmMcCVrbj7Eew+ji+i suPjk/fysWD2J29k0ARC/DXpSb/ltzsrIN+TFQZzUGkVsvHLtne9arLIfuYHYvfRyYRV uodpvLFlT1K5hGSeDfJ6wkyyhhKUmwbvyG9oOqzyvJZs7XLzzzEdeVtV12UISTUYah37 /UAORNeVTCsacd1GpMPCgbtwDzhM+7NcKMQGbcdtCXSSN1zkig9sWZGvcMVaz201fC5L 6j6g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1783386373; x=1783991173; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=e0WA+1xWMmwxJhQG3lcP+OMC81WDVxu32cEwJ7yzLdU=; b=ps1uFakTP4TxwBnB1o3aGw2rPXWItC+sHItqZU8ViDZDNg8umBJlAbKOz48FgAtZqa D5zZj/asPOdmViLmhHKb04VmVb+ujXhZG2hpJUHXLKSnC/IFfWJyVKaifEhsRU0sLfjE mEMUklhGULmA8aAUpPIjOAKbjHwK59xR05KHUpEZCrqQ2xhBKHHvDdd1Hl87jHejDkbo Dakg6tdy5p7DJakixvVuTiYp52ElAa0RQAKJE5SahndFOZ08SIszk/QIvs1PpkNubSU6 HYVj9/Utp6Bl9xca6Ou0pcYUald0uKs9w8tD8rn7rwedgbF/MydLcExmFjcrg7AWT8NA wLYQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AHgh+RoH/oWMtn+GB17diB76vspFmkr6i8wFaof0mPI+t4JEpViaNsW0JmWxVzIWeqXs57UhsshhjUrJGjfDBlY=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxyq67XUIWWmUeMFxjnIoyBf1ioi1HHmIettdIPIrmul40Px4e8 u2Ur38FJxCK6up3X/lrj1PPeK96oyRgyHDtigfXZ0bKHdjhtFjkMmYeqMIkNGzyCd2vha1GM7LW Ud7ynIigFMdfj/8ajKTcQ7se0HV9w840= X-Gm-Gg: AfdE7cl0zCjeddBTE9jv5qVRPdyCD5SzEEhvn+OV6eBZkdM+VxT1cU35i8EOm6z1Xiw 9OWWHlrTtVpZ+i7kXMh8MQwqdua7AjcLdn3FcTOoKd9xjYio/3eIhav5n3szovYnIsJghYXqx6G KDe21A+1ifKbUWPjsU3oEA5efkK7w6JH9rzazXShGguJ0VK5oi9e+sTnCa/UwVVicFKoXngAnxo ZmSjx8bcdw/3L6ZElENRT6INalB1T1vgcgV7LD52N41/u5iztbRugQ0Vq/dEochgvDGsWKDOkqD /XaGD316LJ1rvJNppZS44a4OcXbSnMN51rHcBQrJ5/KGA2GKyFU8UppigXfn2FskmKQsk/XdVw= = X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:a2d9:b0:c12:cacc:92c6 with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-c15a699604bmr108442866b.59.1783386372722; Mon, 06 Jul 2026 18:06:12 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20260703092815.4602-1-swethav0411@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Swetha Vadlakonda Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2026 06:36:01 +0530 X-Gm-Features: AVVi8CeXlaZFCuhFG6NwSUSQ8oaTkB5rs31sBMoBozWu9soJY8C4jbsGkGRjM28 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] fuse: add folio_max_order and folio_min_order controls in fusectl To: Joanne Koong Cc: Miklos Szeredi , fuse-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jul 7, 2026 at 2:40=E2=80=AFAM Joanne Koong wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 3, 2026 at 2:31=E2=80=AFAM Vadlakonda Swetha wrote: > > > > Expose `folio_max_order` and `folio_min_order` entries under the FUSE > > control filesystem (`/sys/fs/fuse/connections//`). > > > > Motivation: > > For fuse based systems like GCSFuse (Google Cloud Storage Fuse), large > > folios gives a significant boost to the read performance. > > - Without large folios, single file read perf is capped at 3GiB/s > > - With large folios, we are able to achieve 12GiB/s, 1MB blocksize > > - Writes:2GiB/s with large folios vs 1.6GiB/s without folios for 1MB bs > > > > We understand that subfolio dirty page tracking is not available for > > writeback cache with large folios. However this is not a blocker for > > The buffered write and writeback paths in fuse go through iomap which > tracks subfolio dirty state. Thanks for the review and update. I was under the impression that not all changes related to subfolio dirty page tracking are done. > > > GCSFuse and similar cloud/network-based filesystems for the following > > reasons: > > > > 1. We generally recommend applications to use larger io sizes (>1MB) > > for writes because of the latency involved with the network calls. > > 2. Random writes & small overwrites are also not recommended for cloud > > based filesystems. > > 3. Beneficial when write back cache is explicitly disabled. Incase of > > GCSFuse, write back cache is disabled for different other reasons. > > > > Providing these controls allow individual filesystems to explicitly opt > > into large folios once they evaluate their specific workload patterns. > > Could you explain the use case of this granularity? The page cache > already adjusts folio size adaptively (eg small/random i/o still has > small orders, high-order allocations fall back gracefully to > lower-order allocations under memory pressure, etc) so it's a bit > unclear to me why a tunable would be needed. It also won't enforce the > order for any inodes that are already in the cache. Our primary motivation was to give fine-grained control and users can set it as per their workload requirements. But agreed on the fallback strategy = and have a single on/off switch. > > There's a patch to enable large folios by default [1] and the > benchmark numbers showed improvements all around, so I don't think > this would be something individual filesystems would have to > explicitly opt into. Does the change in [1] suffice for your use case? Yes, the change in [1] completely suffices for GCSFuse.