linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] block: add support for carrying a stream ID in a bio

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

Date:	Tue, 24 Mar 2015 19:42:21 -0600
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	Ming Lin-SSI <ming.l@....samsung.com>,
	Matias Bjørling 
	<m@...rling.me>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] block: add support for carrying a stream ID in a
 bio

On 03/24/2015 04:07 PM, Ming Lin-SSI wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jens Axboe [mailto:axboe@...nel.dk]
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 10:27 AM
>> To: Matias Bjørling; Jens Axboe; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-
>> fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
>> Cc: Ming Lin-SSI
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] block: add support for carrying a stream ID in a bio
>>
>> On 03/24/2015 11:11 AM, Matias Bjørling wrote:
>>> On 03/24/2015 04:26 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>> The top bits of bio->bi_flags are reserved for keeping the allocation
>>>> pool, set aside the next four bits for carrying a stream ID. That
>>>> leaves us with support for 15 streams,
>>>> 0 is reserved as a "stream not set" value.
>>>
>>> 15 streams seem very limited. Can this be extended? e.g. 16 bits.
>>>
>>> 15 streams is enough for 1-4 applications. More, and applications
>>> starts to fight over the same stream id's, leading them to place
>>> different age data in same flash blocks and push us back to square one.
>>>
>>> I understand that Samsung multi-stream SSD supports a limited amount
>>> of streams, more advance implementations should provide higher limits.
>>
>> Pushing it higher is not a big deal as far as the implementation goes, though
>> 16 bits might be stealing a bit too much space for this. On 32-bit archs, we
>> have 18 bits currently free that we can abuse. The Samsung device supports
>> 16 streams. That's honestly a lot more than I would expect most devices to
>> support in hardware, 16 is a lot of open erase blocks and write append points.
>> Obviously the open channel effort would make that more feasible, though.
>
> Can we use 8 bits at least? I'll test performance with 16 streams.

We could, but I still question whether that's really useful. I'd rather 
start smaller and go bigger if there's a real use case for it. It wont 
change the user space ABI if we later make it larger.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/