From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH 1/2] add block device cache
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 15:41:51 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56EB249F.50706@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56EB2290.30705@nelint.com>
On 03/17/2016 03:33 PM, Eric Nelson wrote:
> Thanks for the review(s) Stephen.
>
> On 03/17/2016 02:16 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 03/16/2016 03:40 PM, Eric Nelson wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com>
>>
>> A patch description would be useful here; the cover letter wouldn't be
>> checked in.
>>
>
> Yeah. Please hote the RFC.
>
> I was really hoping for some broader feedback about whether this
> is a better approach than the more specialized ext4 extent cache.
>
> If I can get an ack on the approach, I think a minimal block
> device cache would support at least 2 or 4 entries, and I'd
> need to be able to answer the questions from your other
> response:
>
>> Do you have any stats on how many operations this saves for typical FS operations such as:
>>
>> - Partition table type identification (with various types such as MBR/DOS, GPT, ...)
>> - Partition enumeration
>> - Filesystem identification (with various filesystems such as FAT, ext, ...)
>> - File reads
>
> Should I interpret this as support of a small(ish) block device cache?
Conceptually I think it sounds OK provided it yields some demonstrable
improvement across a variety of use-cases, and the design doesn't
prevent it addressing obvious other cases it should address.
You probably want to Cc (or hope they see this and provide feedback
anyway) a few other people such as Tom Rini, Simon Glass, Marek Vasut, etc.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-17 21:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-16 18:42 [U-Boot] ext4 and caching Eric Nelson
2016-03-16 21:40 ` [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH 0/2] simple cache layer for block devices Eric Nelson
2016-03-16 21:40 ` [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH 1/2] add block device cache Eric Nelson
2016-03-17 21:16 ` Stephen Warren
2016-03-17 21:33 ` Eric Nelson
2016-03-17 21:41 ` Stephen Warren [this message]
2016-03-20 22:13 ` Tom Rini
2016-03-20 22:51 ` Eric Nelson
2016-03-16 21:40 ` [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH 2/2] mmc: add support for " Eric Nelson
2016-03-17 21:23 ` Stephen Warren
2016-03-20 19:35 ` Eric Nelson
2016-03-20 22:13 ` Tom Rini
2016-03-20 22:54 ` Eric Nelson
2016-03-21 18:31 ` Eric Nelson
2016-03-26 0:11 ` Eric Nelson
2016-04-09 17:55 ` Simon Glass
2016-04-10 14:31 ` Eric Nelson
2016-03-21 14:27 ` Eric Nelson
2016-03-19 15:42 ` [U-Boot] ext4 and caching Ioan Nicu
2016-03-20 15:02 ` Eric Nelson
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=56EB249F.50706@wwwdotorg.org \
--to=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/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