2013/6/27, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>: > Hi, > > 2013-06-26 (수), 14:10 +0900, Namjae Jeon: >> 2013/6/25, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>: >> >> > - any priority scheme for cleaning? >> >> Could you plz tell me a little more detail ? >> > >> > I meant, as well as the GC times, user also gives a kind of status >> > like: >> > LONG_IDLE, SHORT_IDLE, something like that. >> > Therefore, how about using this information to select a victim >> > selection >> > policy between cost-benefit and greedy algorithms? >> currently we will provide the option of updating the time values from >> the ‘sysfs’ interface, and the GC policy is selected by default from >> GC thread based upon the gc type, BG or FG. >> So, do you mean we should provide an option to select the default GC >> policy for the user using ‘sysfs’ interface? Like, if the user sets >> “LONG_IDLE” – we choose Cost Benefit and in case of SHORT_IDLE >> “Greedy” ? Please elaborate more on this. > > Yes, exact. > For example, if an user configures a small period of GC interval but > gives LONG_IDLE, we can choose cost-benefit. > But, if SHORT_IDLE is given with a long GC period, we need to choose > greedy. > How do you think? Hi. Jaegeuk. Looks reasonable to me. I will provide a policy attribute for f2fs sysfs with values, LONG_IDLE and SHORT_IDLE with gc time. Thanks :) > Thanks, > > -- > Jaegeuk Kim > Samsung > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
