linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] lightnvm: pblk: Introduce hot-cold data separation

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]

Message-ID: <a1df8967-2169-1c43-c55a-e2144fa53b9a@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 26 Apr 2019 15:46:38 +0200
From:   Igor Konopko <igor.j.konopko@...el.com>
To:     Javier González <javier@...igon.com>
Cc:     Heiner Litz <hlitz@...c.edu>,
        Matias Bjørling <mb@...htnvm.io>,
        Hans Holmberg <hans.holmberg@...xlabs.com>,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lightnvm: pblk: Introduce hot-cold data separation



On 26.04.2019 12:04, Javier González wrote:
> 
>> On 26 Apr 2019, at 11.11, Igor Konopko <igor.j.konopko@...el.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 25.04.2019 07:21, Heiner Litz wrote:
>>> Introduce the capability to manage multiple open lines. Maintain one line
>>> for user writes (hot) and a second line for gc writes (cold). As user and
>>> gc writes still utilize a shared ring buffer, in rare cases a multi-sector
>>> write will contain both gc and user data. This is acceptable, as on a
>>> tested SSD with minimum write size of 64KB, less than 1% of all writes
>>> contain both hot and cold sectors.
>>
>> Hi Heiner
>>
>> Generally I really like this changes, I was thinking about sth similar since a while, so it is very good to see that patch.
>>
>> I have a one question related to this patch, since it is not very clear for me - how you ensure the data integrity in following scenarios:
>> -we have open line X for user data and line Y for GC
>> -GC writes LBA=N to line Y
>> -user writes LBA=N to line X
>> -we have power failure when both line X and Y were not written completely
>> -during pblk creation we are executing OOB metadata recovery
>> And here is the question, how we distinguish whether LBA=N from line Y or LBA=N from line X is the valid one?
>> Line X and Y might have seq_id either descending or ascending - this would create two possible scenarios too.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Igor
>>
> 
> You are right, I think this is possible in the current implementation.
> 
> We need an extra constrain so that we only GC lines above the GC line
> ID. This way, when we order lines on recovery, we can guarantee
> consistency. This means potentially that we would need several open
> lines for GC to avoid padding in case this constrain forces to choose a
> line with an ID higher than the GC line ID.
> 
> What do you think?

I'm not sure yet about your approach, I need to think and analyze this a 
little more.

I also believe that probably we need to ensure that current user data 
line seq_id is always above the current GC line seq_id or sth like that. 
We cannot also then GC any data from the lines which are still open, but 
I believe that this is a case even right now.

> 
> Thanks,
> Javier
>