[LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] Large block for I/O

Bart Van Assche bvanassche at acm.org
Mon Jan 8 11:30:10 PST 2024


On 12/21/23 21:37, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 05:13:43AM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> It clearly solves a problem (and the one I think it's solving is the
>> size of the FTL map).  But I can't see why we should stop working on it,
>> just because not all drive manufacturers want to support it.
> 
> I don't think it is drive vendors.  It is is the SSD divisions which
> all pretty much love it (for certain use cases) vs the UFS/eMMC
> divisions which tends to often be fearful and less knowledgeable (to
> say it nicely) no matter what vendor you're talking to.

Hi Christoph,

If there is a significant number of 4 KiB writes in a workload (e.g.
filesystem metadata writes), and the logical block size is increased from
4 KiB to 16 KiB, this will increase write amplification no matter how the
SSD storage controller has been designed, isn't it? Is there perhaps
something that I'm misunderstanding?

Thanks,

Bart.





More information about the Linux-nvme mailing list