Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 23 Nov 2015 10:26:24 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] lightnvm: calculate device values correctly | From | Wenwei Tao <> |
| |
OK, I see. Thanks for the explanation.
2015-11-23 2:34 GMT+08:00 Matias <mb@lightnvm.io>: > On 11/22/2015 02:51 PM, Wenwei Tao wrote: >> >> In the original calculation, the relationships among >> block, plane and lun was confusing, refine it on the >> basis of Open-channelSSDInterfaceSpecification. >> >> Signed-off-by: Wenwei Tao <ww.tao0320@gmail.com> >> --- >> drivers/lightnvm/core.c | 9 ++++----- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/lightnvm/core.c b/drivers/lightnvm/core.c >> index f659e60..1864b94 100644 >> --- a/drivers/lightnvm/core.c >> +++ b/drivers/lightnvm/core.c >> @@ -174,8 +174,8 @@ static int nvm_core_init(struct nvm_dev *dev) >> dev->nr_chnls = grp->num_ch; >> dev->luns_per_chnl = grp->num_lun; >> dev->pgs_per_blk = grp->num_pg; >> - dev->blks_per_lun = grp->num_blk; >> dev->nr_planes = grp->num_pln; >> + dev->blks_per_lun = grp->num_blk * grp->num_pln; >> dev->sec_size = grp->csecs; >> dev->oob_size = grp->sos; >> dev->sec_per_pg = grp->fpg_sz / grp->csecs; >> @@ -191,13 +191,12 @@ static int nvm_core_init(struct nvm_dev *dev) >> dev->plane_mode = NVM_PLANE_QUAD; >> >> /* calculated values */ >> - dev->sec_per_pl = dev->sec_per_pg * dev->nr_planes; >> - dev->sec_per_blk = dev->sec_per_pl * dev->pgs_per_blk; >> + dev->sec_per_blk = dev->sec_per_pg * dev->pgs_per_blk; >> + dev->sec_per_pl = dev->sec_per_blk * grp->num_blk; >> dev->sec_per_lun = dev->sec_per_blk * dev->blks_per_lun; >> dev->nr_luns = dev->luns_per_chnl * dev->nr_chnls; >> >> - dev->total_blocks = dev->nr_planes * >> - dev->blks_per_lun * >> + dev->total_blocks = dev->blks_per_lun * >> dev->luns_per_chnl * >> dev->nr_chnls; >> dev->total_pages = dev->total_blocks * dev->pgs_per_blk; >> > > The reason I had it as before, was because I wanted to drive the device in > either single/double/quad read/write/erase plane mode. That way we could get > away with only managing 1/4 or 1/2 of the block metadata. > > What is your use case? It could make sense, but it will require a little > more work to build up the framework for having the various modes. i.e. > detect supported plane mode, make a explicit decision about which plane mode > to always use (or dynamically) and afterwards allocate the appropriate data > structures.
| |