From: Tim Walker <email@example.com> To: Ric Wheeler <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Bart Van Assche <email@example.com>, Matthew Wilcox <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Linux FS Devel <email@example.com>, "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com> Subject: Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] durability vs performance for flash devices (especially embedded!) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 11:07:09 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <45A42D25-FB2A-43EB-8123-9F7B25590018@seagate.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Hi all- On Wednesday, June 9, 2021 at 9:20:52 PM Ric Wheeler wrote: >On 6/9/21 2:47 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: >> On 6/9/21 11:30 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >>> maybe you should read the paper. >>> >>> " Thiscomparison demonstrates that using F2FS, a flash-friendly file >>> sys-tem, does not mitigate the wear-out problem, except inasmuch asit >>> inadvertently rate limitsallI/O to the device" >> It seems like my email was not clear enough? What I tried to make clear >> is that I think that there is no way to solve the flash wear issue with >> the traditional block interface. I think that F2FS in combination with >> the zone interface is an effective solution. >> >> What is also relevant in this context is that the "Flash drive lifespan >> is a problem" paper was published in 2017. I think that the first >> commercial SSDs with a zone interface became available at a later time >> (summer of 2020?). >> >> Bart. > >Just to address the zone interface support, it unfortunately takes a very long >time to make it down into the world of embedded parts (emmc is super common and >very primitive for example). UFS parts are in higher end devices, have not had a >chance to look at what they offer. > >Ric > > > For zoned block devices, particularly the sequential write zones, maybe it makes more sense for the device to manage wear leveling on a zone-by-zone basis. It seems like it could be pretty easy for a device to decide which head/die to select for a given zone when the zone is initially opened after the last reset write pointer. Best regards, -Tim
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-10 11:14 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-06-09 10:53 Ric Wheeler 2021-06-09 18:05 ` Bart Van Assche 2021-06-09 18:30 ` Matthew Wilcox 2021-06-09 18:47 ` Bart Van Assche 2021-06-10 0:16 ` Damien Le Moal 2021-06-10 1:11 ` Ric Wheeler 2021-06-10 1:20 ` Ric Wheeler 2021-06-10 11:07 ` Tim Walker [this message] 2021-06-10 16:38 ` Keith Busch [not found] ` <CAOtxgyeRf=+grEoHxVLEaSM=Yfx4KrSG5q96SmztpoWfP=QrDg@mail.gmail.com> 2021-06-10 16:22 ` Ric Wheeler 2021-06-10 17:06 ` Matthew Wilcox 2021-06-10 17:25 ` Ric Wheeler 2021-06-10 17:57 ` Viacheslav Dubeyko 2021-06-13 20:41 ` [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] SSDFS: LFS file system without GC operations + NAND flash devices lifetime prolongation Viacheslav Dubeyko
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=45A42D25-FB2A-43EB-8123-9F7B25590018@seagate.com \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --subject='Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] durability vs performance for flash devices (especially embedded'\!')' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).