crush multiweight implementation details

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Sage,

We could have:

struct crush_choose_arg {
  __u32 bucket_id;
  __u32 num_items;
  __u32 *ids; // override the bucket items for placement
  __u32 num_positions;
  __u32 *weights; // size is num_positions*num_items
};
 
struct crush_choose_arg_map {
  struct crush_choose_arg *args;
  __u32 size;
};

and

void crush_init_workspace(const struct crush_map *m, struct crush_choose_arg_map *arg_map, void *v) {
...
if (m->buckets[b]->id == arg_map[b]->bucket_id)
   w->work[b]->arg = arg_map[b];
...
}

with

struct crush_work_bucket {
    __u32 perm_x; /* @x for which *perm is defined */
    __u32 perm_n; /* num elements of *perm that are permuted/defined */
    __u32 *perm;  /* Permutation of the bucket's items */
    struct crush_choose_arg *arg;
};

There would be no need to change the code path since crush_bucket_choose already is given the crush_work_bucket. And crush_init_workspace already has logic that is algorithm dependent. And all the sanity checks could be done in crush_init_workspace so that the choose function only does what's absolutely necessary.

What do you think ?

Cheers

-- 
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux