From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
To: Ollie Lho <ollie@sis.com.tw>
Cc: kira brown <kira@hex.linuxgrrls.org>,
Herman Oosthuysen <herman@wirelessnetworksinc.com>,
"'linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org'" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: DiskOnChip write performance
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 09:08:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <17891.999850127@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3B981BF6.24FD764D@sis.com.tw>
ollie@sis.com.tw said:
> > Don't forget "don't use O(n^3) algorithms when trying to find a new
> > block to write to".
> What does this suppose to mean ??
Algorithms which take time proportional to the cube of 'n', where n is some
variable indicating the complexity of the task - in this case it would be
the number of blocks on the DiskOnChip which are to be considered for
selection.
In fact, I don't think there's anything quite as stupid as O(n^3) in there,
but it _is_ extremely naïve in places and needs a rethink of some of the
data structures to allow some operations to operate in linear time, and to
improve the wear levelling. The wear levelling at the moment is nonexistent
- we always pick the longest chain, and if you have a one-block chain which
never gets rewritten, NFTL will never cycle the block it's in.
> Did you "threaded" NFTL code yet ?? Or we still get locked when NFTL
> is syncing/flushing ??
I've put the necessary locking into the doc2000 driver. We can call it
concurrently now. But haven't threaded NFTL to take advantage of it.
The core of the current NFTL code has just sort of evolved from my initial
hacks to see if I could get it to understand a DiskOnChip, and then to see
if I could write to it without confusing the DOS drivers. And it hasn't
evolved far. Ideally, it wants to be completely rewritten.
--
dwmw2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-09-07 8:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-09-06 15:01 DiskOnChip write performance Holger Friedrich
2001-09-06 15:02 ` David Woodhouse
2001-09-07 1:02 ` Ollie Lho
2001-09-06 15:05 ` kira brown
2001-09-06 15:45 ` Herman Oosthuysen
2001-09-06 15:49 ` David Woodhouse
2001-09-06 16:45 ` Herman Oosthuysen
2001-09-06 15:52 ` kira brown
2001-09-06 15:55 ` David Woodhouse
2001-09-07 0:59 ` Ollie Lho
2001-09-07 7:12 ` Bjorn Eriksson
2001-09-07 8:08 ` David Woodhouse [this message]
2001-09-07 9:49 ` Ollie Lho
2001-09-07 10:01 ` David Woodhouse
2001-09-06 15:59 ` David Woodhouse
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=17891.999850127@redhat.com \
--to=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=herman@wirelessnetworksinc.com \
--cc=kira@hex.linuxgrrls.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=ollie@sis.com.tw \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox