On 11/30/06, Jens Wilke <[email protected]> wrote:
- You don't keep track of I/O on the fly to the cache that is mapped
directly in cache_hit(). How do you make sure that this I/O is completed
before you replace a cache block?
The previous I/O from cache hit and the later I/O for cache
replacement should be queued in order on the cache block device - is
this a safe assumption?
- The cache block index is hashed, this means the cache data blocks are not
clustered. I don't think you can solve this problem with a proper hash function.
Perhaps you should consider a (B-)Tree structure for that.
The current hash algorithm does clustering to some extent by mapping
consecutive blocks from the source device to consecutive blocks on the
cache device. But I agree that more sophisticated algorithms can be
studied.
Thanks a lot for the suggestions. I will try to incorporate them in
the next patch.
- Ming
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
