Hi, I am posting this again to the correct mailing list as I cc'ed it to the old inactive one.
Maybe I am understanding something wrong, but if I would use the count of reclaimed segments, how could I determine if one cleaning pass has finished as I don't know in advance how many segments could be reclaimed ? Another approach would be not basing cleaning on a whole cleaning pass but instead creating these addtional configfile options: # start cleaning if less than 100 free segments min_clean_segments 100 # stop cleaning if more than 200 free segments max_clean_segments 200 # check free space once an hour segment_check_interval 3600 Basically in this example if less than 800mb are free cleaner is run until 1600mb are free. If min_clean_segments is 0, the cleaner would do normal operation. For this solution only changes in configfile loading and nilfs_cleanerd_clean_loop would be necessary which would lower the risk of introducing new bugs. If this solution is ok for you, I will implement it this way and send you the patch in a few days. Also tell me if the names I have choosen for the options are ok for you or if you would prefer other ones. Thanks in advance Bye, David Arendt On 03/14/10 15:28, Ryusuke Konishi wrote: > Hi, > On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 14:00:19 +0100, ad...@prnet.org wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I will try to implement this myself then. Concerning the >> nilfs_cleanerd_select segments function I was unclear in my post. In >> fact I did not mean the return value but the first element from the >> segnums array. >> > Ok. So you thought of determining termination of one cleaning pass by > the segment number stored preliminarily. > > Why not just use count of processed (i.e. reclaimed) segments? > > Note that it's not guranteed that segments are selected in the order > of segment number though this premise looks almost right. > > It depends on the behavior of segment allocator and the current > "Select-oldest" algorithm used behind > nilfs_cleanerd_select_segments(). Nilfs log writer occasionally > behaves differently and disturbs this order. > > I think you can ignore the exceptional behavior of the segment > allocator, and rotate target segments with skipping free or mostly > in-use ones. In that case, nilfs_cleanerd_select_segments() should be > modified to select segments in the order of segment number. > > Cheers, > Ryusuke Konishi > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
