[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080918.040945.32654226.ryusuke@osrg.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 04:09:45 +0900 (JST)
From: Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@....ntt.co.jp>
To: joern@...fs.org
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kihara.seiji@....ntt.co.jp,
amagai.yoshiji@....ntt.co.jp
Subject: Re: [PATCH 25/27] nilfs2: block cache for garbage collection
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:41:47 +0200, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Mon, 15 September 2008 04:08:22 +0900, Ryusuke Konishi wrote:
> >
> > This adds the cache of on-disk blocks to be moved in garbage
> > collection. The disk blocks are held with dummy inodes (called
> > gcinodes), and this file provides lookup function of the dummy inodes,
> > and their buffer read function.
>
> Nice explanation. Can you add it to the comment header at the top of
> the file? Unlike the GPL preample, it actually helps non-lawyers. ;)
Well, I see. ;)
> Using dummy inodes is... unusual. Why can you not use the actual inodes
> those blocks belong to?
Because we have to treat blocks that belong to a same file but have
different checkpoint numbers. (NILFS2 keeps up multiple
checkpoints/snapshots across GC)
Of course, if the standard inode hash is applicable, I prefer it.
ilookup5 or its variant may be applicable for this.
If so, the remaining problem would be the lock dependencies as you
mentioned before.
> Or alternatively a single inode that simply
> covers the complete physical device?
>
> Jörn
NILFS2 writes GC blocks per file like other files, so the per file
caches (even separate inodes) are convienient for this end.
Ryusuke
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists