Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] Re: Announcement: STEC EnhanceIO SSD caching software for Linux kernel

[Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>]

On Mon, Jan 21 2013 at 12:26am -0500,
Amit Kale <akale@stec-inc.com> wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mike Snitzer [mailto:snitzer@redhat.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 3:08 AM
> > To: Darrick J. Wong
> > Cc: device-mapper development; Amit Kale; linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org;
> > kent.overstreet@gmail.com; LKML; lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org; Joe
> > Thornber
> > Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] Re: [dm-devel] Announcement: STEC EnhanceIO
> > SSD caching software for Linux kernel
> > 
> > On Fri, Jan 18 2013 at  4:25pm -0500,
> > Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Since Joe is putting together a testing tree to compare the three
> > > caching things, what do you all think of having a(nother) session
> > > about ssd caching at this year's LSFMM Summit?
> > >
> > > [Apologies for hijacking the thread.]
> > > [Adding lsf-pc to the cc list.]
> > 
> > Hopefully we'll have some findings on the comparisons well before LSF
> > (since we currently have some momentum).  But yes it may be worthwhile
> > to discuss things further and/or report findings.
> 
> We should have performance comparisons presented well before the
> summit. It'll be good to have ssd caching session in any case. The
> likelihood that one of them will be included in Linux kernel before
> April is very low.

dm-cache is under active review for upstream inclusion.  I wouldn't
categorize the chances of dm-cache going upstream when the v3.9 merge
window opens as "very low".  But even if dm-cache does go upstream it
doesn't preclude bcache and/or enhanceio from going upstream too.