Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1557375
| From | Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 04/10] f2fs: support IO alignment for DATA and NODE writes |
| Date | 2017-01-12 12:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sYLAe-3jp-39@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <sUazf-86o-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <sUazf-86o-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <sVP7j-27Q-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <sW3Dk-3ex-27@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 2017/1/5 7:44, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 01/04, Chao Yu wrote: >> Hi Jaegeuk, >> >> On 2016/12/31 2:51, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>> This patch implements IO alignment by filling dummy blocks in DATA and NODE >>> write bios. If we can guarantee, for example, 32KB or 64KB for such the IOs, >>> we can eliminate underlying dummy page problem which FTL conducts in order to >>> close MLC or TLC partial written pages. >>> >>> Note that, >>> - it requires "-o mode=lfs". >>> - IO size should be power of 2, not exceed BIO_MAX_PAGES, 256. >>> - read IO is still 4KB. >>> - do checkpoint at fsync, if dummy NODE page was written. >> >> Which scenario we can benefit from? Any numbers? > > I described it in the patch. This is not targetting for performance improvement > for now, but to address the dummy page write problem in FTL so that we can later > implement very simple host-level FTL on top of open-channel SSD. Alright, if we are doing this since FTL implementation is moved up, so I can understand that. Thanks, > >> I doubt that there are some potential side-effect points: >> - write amplification will be more serious than before >> - free space will be more fragmented since dummy blocks is separated in whole >> address space >> - there is less chance to merge small(unaligned) IOs in block layer > > I agree, so I just added this as a mount option experimentally. > One point would be that, if f2fs doesn't do this, FTL should do it. So I think, > from the system point of view, f2fs is a better layer to do it. > > Thanks, > >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Thanks, > > . >
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 04/10] f2fs: support IO alignment for DATA and NODE writes Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com> - 2017-01-04 09:30 +0100
Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 04/10] f2fs: support IO alignment for DATA and NODE writes Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> - 2017-01-05 01:00 +0100
Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 04/10] f2fs: support IO alignment for DATA and NODE writes Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com> - 2017-01-12 12:20 +0100
csiph-web