Hi Kim,
I am afraid your fix still has some problems when the section/segment != 1,
when the segment has zero valid blocks but the section does not,
the blocks of that deleted file can still not notify the FTL by the small
discards in your fix. And even in the case section/segment == 1, the
Hi Kim,
I am afraid your fix still has some problems when the section/segment != 1,
when the segment has zero valid blocks but the section does not,
the blocks of that deleted file can still not notify the FTL by the small
discards in your fix. And even in the case section/segment == 1, the
On 01/04, Yunlong Song wrote:
> Hi Kim,
> Although the blocks of that file will finally be discarded when it is not
> current segment any more and almost fully invalidate,
> but the point is that the blocks of that file can only be discarded along
> with the whole segment now, which violates
On 01/04, Yunlong Song wrote:
> Hi Kim,
> Although the blocks of that file will finally be discarded when it is not
> current segment any more and almost fully invalidate,
> but the point is that the blocks of that file can only be discarded along
> with the whole segment now, which violates
Hi Kim,
Although the blocks of that file will finally be discarded when it is not
current segment any more and almost fully invalidate,
but the point is that the blocks of that file can only be discarded along with
the whole segment now, which violates the meaning
of small discard. Look at
Hi Kim,
Although the blocks of that file will finally be discarded when it is not
current segment any more and almost fully invalidate,
but the point is that the blocks of that file can only be discarded along with
the whole segment now, which violates the meaning
of small discard. Look at
Hi Yunlong,
On 01/03, Yunlong Song wrote:
> In the small discard case, when se->valid_blocks is zero, the
> add_discard_addrs
> will directly return without __add_discard_entry. This will cause the file
> delete have no small discard. The case is like this:
>
> 1. Allocate free 2M segment
> 2.
Hi Yunlong,
On 01/03, Yunlong Song wrote:
> In the small discard case, when se->valid_blocks is zero, the
> add_discard_addrs
> will directly return without __add_discard_entry. This will cause the file
> delete have no small discard. The case is like this:
>
> 1. Allocate free 2M segment
> 2.
On 2017/1/3 17:01, Yunlong Song wrote:
> In the small discard case, when se->valid_blocks is zero, the
> add_discard_addrs
> will directly return without __add_discard_entry. This will cause the file
> delete have no small discard. The case is like this:
>
> 1. Allocate free 2M segment
> 2.
On 2017/1/3 17:01, Yunlong Song wrote:
> In the small discard case, when se->valid_blocks is zero, the
> add_discard_addrs
> will directly return without __add_discard_entry. This will cause the file
> delete have no small discard. The case is like this:
>
> 1. Allocate free 2M segment
> 2.
In the small discard case, when se->valid_blocks is zero, the add_discard_addrs
will directly return without __add_discard_entry. This will cause the file
delete have no small discard. The case is like this:
1. Allocate free 2M segment
2. Write a file (size n blocks < 512) in that 2M segment,
In the small discard case, when se->valid_blocks is zero, the add_discard_addrs
will directly return without __add_discard_entry. This will cause the file
delete have no small discard. The case is like this:
1. Allocate free 2M segment
2. Write a file (size n blocks < 512) in that 2M segment,
12 matches
Mail list logo
