linux-block.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ric Wheeler <ricwheeler@gmail.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] durability vs performance for flash devices (especially embedded!)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 21:20:38 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e191c791-4646-bf47-0435-5b0d665eca89@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e9eaf87d-5c04-8974-4f0f-0fc9bac9a3b1@acm.org>

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



  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-06-10  1:20 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 [this message]
2021-06-10 11:07         ` Tim Walker
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=e191c791-4646-bf47-0435-5b0d665eca89@gmail.com \
    --to=ricwheeler@gmail.com \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --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).