Hi!
> > Good idea. Are you thinking of a sysfs entry to select the backend?
>
> Not sure on this one, initially I thought of a sysfs file, but then
> how would you do it. One "global" sysfs entry is probably a bad idea.
> Having one per block device to select native vs emulation maybe? And
> a
On 08.12.2020 13:24, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
On 08/12/2020 14:13, Javier González wrote:
On 08.12.2020 12:37, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
On 08/12/2020 13:22, Javier González wrote:
Good idea. Are you thinking of a sysfs entry to select the backend?
Not sure on this one, initially I thought
Hannes,
[Sorry I'm late to the discussion here, had a few fires going in
addition to the end of the kernel cycle]
> And we shouldn't forget that the main issue which killed all previous
> implementations was a missing QoS guarantee.
That and the fact that our arbitrary stacking situation was
On 08/12/2020 14:13, Javier González wrote:
> On 08.12.2020 12:37, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>> On 08/12/2020 13:22, Javier González wrote:
>>> Good idea. Are you thinking of a sysfs entry to select the backend?
>>
>> Not sure on this one, initially I thought of a sysfs file, but then
>> how would
On 08.12.2020 12:37, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
On 08/12/2020 13:22, Javier González wrote:
Good idea. Are you thinking of a sysfs entry to select the backend?
Not sure on this one, initially I thought of a sysfs file, but then
how would you do it. One "global" sysfs entry is probably a bad
On 08/12/2020 13:22, Javier González wrote:
> Good idea. Are you thinking of a sysfs entry to select the backend?
Not sure on this one, initially I thought of a sysfs file, but then
how would you do it. One "global" sysfs entry is probably a bad idea.
Having one per block device to select native
On 08.12.2020 08:40, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
On 07/12/2020 20:27, Javier González wrote:
Good point. We can share some performance data on how Simple Copy scales
in terms of bw / latency and the CPU usage. Do you have anything else in
mind?
With an emulation in the kernel, we could make
On 08.12.2020 07:44, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 12/7/20 11:12 PM, Douglas Gilbert wrote:
On 2020-12-07 9:56 a.m., Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 12/7/20 3:11 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
So, I'm really worried about:
a) a good use case. GC in f2fs or btrfs seem like good use cases, as
does
On 07/12/2020 20:27, Javier González wrote:
> Good point. We can share some performance data on how Simple Copy scales
> in terms of bw / latency and the CPU usage. Do you have anything else in
> mind?
>
With an emulation in the kernel, we could make the usd "backend"
implementation
On 12/7/20 11:12 PM, Douglas Gilbert wrote:
On 2020-12-07 9:56 a.m., Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 12/7/20 3:11 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
So, I'm really worried about:
a) a good use case. GC in f2fs or btrfs seem like good use cases, as
does accelating dm-kcopyd. I agree with Damien
On 2020-12-07 9:56 a.m., Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 12/7/20 3:11 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
So, I'm really worried about:
a) a good use case. GC in f2fs or btrfs seem like good use cases, as
does accelating dm-kcopyd. I agree with Damien that lifting dm-kcopyd
to common code
On 07.12.2020 15:56, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 12/7/20 3:11 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
So, I'm really worried about:
a) a good use case. GC in f2fs or btrfs seem like good use cases, as
does accelating dm-kcopyd. I agree with Damien that lifting dm-kcopyd
to common code would also
On 07.12.2020 15:11, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
So, I'm really worried about:
a) a good use case. GC in f2fs or btrfs seem like good use cases, as
does accelating dm-kcopyd. I agree with Damien that lifting dm-kcopyd
to common code would also be really nice. I'm not 100% sure it should
On 12/7/20 3:11 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
So, I'm really worried about:
a) a good use case. GC in f2fs or btrfs seem like good use cases, as
does accelating dm-kcopyd. I agree with Damien that lifting dm-kcopyd
to common code would also be really nice. I'm not 100% sure it
So, I'm really worried about:
a) a good use case. GC in f2fs or btrfs seem like good use cases, as
does accelating dm-kcopyd. I agree with Damien that lifting dm-kcopyd
to common code would also be really nice. I'm not 100% sure it should
be a requirement, but it sure would be
On 2020/12/07 17:16, javier.g...@samsung.com wrote:
> On 07.12.2020 08:06, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> On 2020/12/07 16:46, javier.g...@samsung.com wrote:
>>> On 04.12.2020 23:40, Keith Busch wrote:
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 11:25:12AM +, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 2020/12/04 20:02,
On 07.12.2020 08:06, Damien Le Moal wrote:
On 2020/12/07 16:46, javier.g...@samsung.com wrote:
On 04.12.2020 23:40, Keith Busch wrote:
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 11:25:12AM +, Damien Le Moal wrote:
On 2020/12/04 20:02, SelvaKumar S wrote:
This patchset tries to add support for TP4065a
On 2020/12/07 16:46, javier.g...@samsung.com wrote:
> On 04.12.2020 23:40, Keith Busch wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 11:25:12AM +, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>>> On 2020/12/04 20:02, SelvaKumar S wrote:
This patchset tries to add support for TP4065a ("Simple Copy Command"),
On 04.12.2020 23:40, Keith Busch wrote:
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 11:25:12AM +, Damien Le Moal wrote:
On 2020/12/04 20:02, SelvaKumar S wrote:
> This patchset tries to add support for TP4065a ("Simple Copy Command"),
> v2020.05.04 ("Ratified")
>
> The Specification can be found in following
On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 11:25:12AM +, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 2020/12/04 20:02, SelvaKumar S wrote:
> > This patchset tries to add support for TP4065a ("Simple Copy Command"),
> > v2020.05.04 ("Ratified")
> >
> > The Specification can be found in following link.
> >
On 2020/12/04 20:02, SelvaKumar S wrote:
> This patchset tries to add support for TP4065a ("Simple Copy Command"),
> v2020.05.04 ("Ratified")
>
> The Specification can be found in following link.
> https://nvmexpress.org/wp-content/uploads/NVM-Express-1.4-Ratified-TPs-1.zip
>
> This is an RFC.
This patchset tries to add support for TP4065a ("Simple Copy Command"),
v2020.05.04 ("Ratified")
The Specification can be found in following link.
https://nvmexpress.org/wp-content/uploads/NVM-Express-1.4-Ratified-TPs-1.zip
This is an RFC. Looking forward for any feedbacks or other alternate
22 matches
Mail list logo
