On 11.11.2024 09:43, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
On 11.11.24 10:41, Javier Gonzalez wrote:
On 11.11.2024 09:37, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
On 11.11.24 10:31, Javier Gonzalez wrote:
On 11.11.2024 07:51, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 05:43:44PM +0000, Javier Gonzalez wrote:
We have been iterating in the patches for years, but it is unfortunately
one of these series that go in circles forever. I don't think it is due
to any specific problem, but mostly due to unaligned requests form
different folks reviewing. Last time I talked to Damien he asked me to
send the patches again; we have not followed through due to bandwidth.
A big problem is that it actually lacks a killer use case. If you'd
actually manage to plug it into an in-kernel user and show a real
speedup people might actually be interested in it and help optimizing
for it.
Agree. Initially it was all about ZNS. Seems ZUFS can use it.
Then we saw good results in offload to target on NVMe-OF, similar to
copy_file_range, but that does not seem to be enough. You seem to
indicacte too that XFS can use it for GC.
We can try putting a new series out to see where we are...
I don't want to sound like a broken record, but I've said more than
once, that btrfs (regardless of zoned or non-zoned) would be very
interested in that as well and I'd be willing to help with the code or
even do it myself once the block bits are in.
But apparently my voice doesn't count here
You are right. Sorry I forgot.
Would this be through copy_file_range or something different?
Unfortunately not, brtfs' reclaim/balance path is a wrapper on top of
buffered read and write (plus some extra things). _BUT_ this makes it
possible to switch the read/write part and do copy offload (where possible).
On 11.11.2024 10:42, hch wrote:
On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 10:41:33AM +0100, Javier Gonzalez wrote:
You are right. Sorry I forgot.
Would this be through copy_file_range or something different?
Just like for f2fs, nilfs2, or the upcoming zoned xfs the prime user
would be the file system GC code.
Replying to both.
Thanks. Makes sense. Now that we can talke a look at your branch, we can
think how this would look like.
