linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: add sysfs support for controlling the gc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAKYAXd8cfvhce3_NWiLOzRz_=sWwqisH=gH4ZMGkxjv_Pt2H7A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 27 Jun 2013 14:43:31 +0900
From:	Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...il.com>
To:	jaegeuk.kim@...sung.com
Cc:	linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@...sung.com>,
	Pankaj Kumar <pankaj.km@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: add sysfs support for controlling the gc_thread

2013/6/27, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk.kim@...sung.com>:
> Hi,
>
> 2013-06-26 (수), 14:10 +0900, Namjae Jeon:
>> 2013/6/25, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk.kim@...sung.com>:
>> >> > - any priority scheme for cleaning?
>> >> Could you plz tell me a little more detail ?
>> >
>> > I meant, as well as the GC times, user also gives a kind of status
>> > like:
>> > LONG_IDLE, SHORT_IDLE, something like that.
>> > Therefore, how about using this information to select a victim
>> > selection
>> > policy between cost-benefit and greedy algorithms?
>> currently we will provide the option of updating the time values from
>> the ‘sysfs’ interface, and the GC policy is selected by default from
>> GC thread based upon the gc type, BG or FG.
>> So, do you mean we should provide an option to select the default GC
>> policy for the user using ‘sysfs’ interface? Like, if the user sets
>> “LONG_IDLE” – we choose Cost Benefit and in case of SHORT_IDLE
>> “Greedy” ? Please elaborate more on this.
>
> Yes, exact.
> For example, if an user configures a small period of GC interval but
> gives LONG_IDLE, we can choose cost-benefit.
> But, if SHORT_IDLE is given with a long GC period, we need to choose
> greedy.
> How do you think?
Hi. Jaegeuk.
Looks reasonable to me.
I will provide a policy attribute for f2fs sysfs with values,
LONG_IDLE and SHORT_IDLE with gc time.

Thanks :)
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Jaegeuk Kim
> Samsung
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
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/