MTD RAID

Boris Brezillon boris.brezillon at free-electrons.com
Mon Aug 22 00:09:47 PDT 2016


On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 12:01:40 +0800
Dongsheng Yang <dongsheng.yang at easystack.cn> wrote:

> On 08/19/2016 07:55 PM, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 19:20:40 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
> > 杨东升 <dongsheng.yang at easystack.cn> wrote:
> >  
> >> Hi guys,Sorry I think i did not express myself clearly. From this reference:
> >>
> >>
> >> https://linas.org/linux/Software-RAID/Software-RAID.txt
> >>
> >>
> >> we can see, RAID stands for "Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks"
> >> and is meant to be a way of creating a fast and reliable
> >> disk-drive subsystem out of individual disks. In the PC
> >> world, "I" has come to stand for "Independent".
> >>
> >>
> >> There are two benifets in RAID, "fast" and "reliable".
> >> So I introduce the RAID framework in MTD world. and implement
> >> 3 types of RAID currently.
> >>
> >>
> >> (1) single: I reuse this work same with what it is in BTRFS.
> >> It's not a standard RAID level. But just concat the devices.
> >>
> >>
> >> (2) RAID0: also known as Striping mode. This can make device faster.
> >>  From what I show in my first email, we can see we can get 51.1 MB/s in dd
> >> although the original device is only 14.0 MB/s.  
> > Some comments on your results. It's all theoretical (based on nandsim),
> > and assuming your NAND chips are connected to the same NAND controller
> > you would just get the same perf as in 'single' mode (accesses through
> > the NAND controller are currently serialized, that's something I'm
> > trying to change but it's not here yet).
> >
> > So yes, in an ideal word, sequential accesses would be improved, but
> > we're not here yet. BTW, did you run this test on a real HW?  
> 
> http://www.fujitsu.com/global/about/resources/news/press-releases/2015/1119-01.html

Is this solution really using a mainline kernel?




More information about the linux-mtd mailing list