On Mon, 10 Apr 2017, Loic Dachary wrote:
> 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.
Allowing overrides of the bucket items too makes me nervous (do we have a
use for that yet?), but otherwise this looks reasonable!
sage
--
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
