[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201209091705.brzbbqedavtxvhms@mpHalley>
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 10:17:05 +0100
From: Javier González <javier@...igon.com>
To: Johannes Thumshirn <Johannes.Thumshirn@....com>
Cc: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
SelvaKumar S <selvakuma.s1@...sung.com>,
"linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
"kbusch@...nel.org" <kbusch@...nel.org>,
"axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@....com>,
"sagi@...mberg.me" <sagi@...mberg.me>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"dm-devel@...hat.com" <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
"snitzer@...hat.com" <snitzer@...hat.com>,
"selvajove@...il.com" <selvajove@...il.com>,
"nj.shetty@...sung.com" <nj.shetty@...sung.com>,
"joshi.k@...sung.com" <joshi.k@...sung.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>,
"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] add simple copy support
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 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 good way to benchmark.
>>
>> I was thinking a per block device to target the use case where a certain
>> implementation / workload is better one way or the other.
>
>Yes something along those lines.
>
>>>
>>> The other idea would be a benchmark loop on boot like the raid library
>>> does.
>>>
>>> Then on the other hand, there might be workloads that run faster with
>>> the emulation and some that run faster with the hardware acceleration.
>>>
>>> I think these points are the reason the last attempts got stuck.
>>
>> Yes. I believe that any benchmark we run would be biased in a certain
>> way. If we can move forward with a sysfs entry and default to legacy
>> path, we would not alter current behavior and enable NVMe copy offload
>> (for now) for those that want to use it. We can then build on top of it.
>>
>> Does this sound like a reasonable approach?
>>
>
>Yes this sounds like a reasonable approach to me.
Cool. We will add this to the V3 then.
Thanks Johannes!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists