DOCSLIB.ORG

Survey of Cleaning Policies in Log Structured File Systems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Survey of Cleaning Policies in Log Structured File Systems International Journal of Trend in Research and Development, Volume 3(2), ISSN: 2394-9333 www.ijtrd.com Survey of Cleaning Policies in Log Structured File Systems 1Abhishek Marathe, 2Prof.Pravin Patil, 3Akshay Borse, 4Chetan Satpute and 5Gopal Heda, 1,2,3,4,5Computer Engineering Department, Pune Institute of Computer Technology, Pune, India Abstract: Over the last decade CPU speeds have increased dramatically while disk access times have improved slowly. This trend is likely to be continued in the future and it will cause more and more applications to become disk bound. Hence to lessen the impact of this problem, a new disk storage management technique called Log Structured file-system has been devised. This file system uses disk as an order of magnitude more efficiently than the current file systems. Segment cleaning policies have been a topic of research for over two decades, but still the most effective segment cleaning policy, cost-benefit, was invented in the late ’80s. Cost-benefit policy is only dependent on throughput, but there are other metrics which are necessary to be considered. Figure 1: NILFS Volume Structure So purpose of this paper is to discuss comparison between The payload blocks are organized per file, and each file consists performances of various log structured file systems like NIL-FS of data blocks and B-tree node blocks: and F2FS. We also discuss the policies used in such log structured policies. After analyzing these performances and identifying their limitations, we conclude with several promising directions for future research. Keywords: Operating System, File-Systems Management, Figure 2: NILFS Payload Block Structure Garbage Collection, Storage. The organization of the blocks is recorded in the summary I. INTRODUCTION information blocks, which contains a header structure, per file structures and per block structures In log structured file system, data is laid out on disk in an append-only manner. Since writes only happen at cursor position, the disk space has to be reclaimed following a garbage collection mechanism called segment cleaning. Segment cleaning has to be continuously performed in the background unlike Figure 3: NILFS Block Organization defragmentation of conventional file systems which is usually The logs include regular files, directory files, symbolic link files user invoked. Continuous segment cleaning is a necessity of the and several meta data files. The meta data files are the files used log structured file systems in order to function but at the same to maintain file system meta data. The current version of NILFS2 time it is a costly operation and requires intelligent policies and uses the following meta data files: efficient design. 1. Inode file (ifile) A. New Implementation of Log Structured File Systems: NILFS 2. Checkpoint file (cpfile) NILFS is a log structured file system implementation of the linux 3. Segment usage file (sufile) kernel. NILFS supports continuous snapshotting. Snapshots can 4. Data address translation file. be used to restore the past state of the NILFS file system. NILFS The following figure shows a typical organization of the logs: is a B-Tree based file system which uses B-tree data structure for inode and file management. The cleaning policies used for segment cleaning are Cost-Benefit and Greedy policies. However background cleaning uses Cost-Benefit policy whereas foreground cleaning uses Greedy policy. Figure 4: NILFS Log Structure NILFS volume is equally divided into a number of segments B. Flash Friendly File System: F2FS except for the super block (SB) and segment. A segment is the container of logs. Each log is composed of summary information F2FS (Flash-Friendly File System) is a Linux file system blocks, payload blocks, and an optional super root block (SR) designed to perform well on modern flash storage devices. This file system is build on the principles used in LFS i.e. append- only logging. Considerations made while designing F2FS were: 1. Flash-friendly on disk layout: F2FS employs three configurable units: segment, section and zone. It allocates IJTRD | Mar-Apr 2016 Available [email protected] 46 International Journal of Trend in Research and Development, Volume 3(2), ISSN: 2394-9333 www.ijtrd.com storage blocks in the unit of segments from a number of NAND flash memory is organized and managed. As illustrated in individual zones. It performs “clean-ing” in the unit of Figure 1, F2FS divides the whole volume into fixed-size section. These units are introduced to align with the segments. The segment is a basic unit of management in F2FS underlying FTL’s operational units to avoid unnecessary and is used to determine the initial file system metadata layout. A (yet costly) data copying. section is comprised of consecutive segments, and a zone 2. Cost-effective index structure: LFS writes data and index consists of a series of sections. These units are important during blocks to newly allocated free space. If a leaf data block is logging and cleaning. F2FS splits the entire volume into 6 parts updated (and written to somewhere), its direct index block as follows: should be updated, too. Once the direct index block is 1. Superblock (SB): Superblock has basic partition written, again its indirect index block should be updated. information and default parameters of F2FS, which are Such recursive updates result in a chain of writes, creating given at the format time and not changeable. the “wandering tree” problem. In order to attack this 2. Checkpoint (CP): Checkpoint keeps the file system status, problem, novel index table called node address table is bitmaps for valid NAT/SIT sets (see below), orphan inode proposed. lists and summary entries of currently active segments. A 3. Multi-head logging: They have devised an effective hot/cold successful “checkpoint pack” should store a consistent F2FS data separation scheme applied during logging time (i.e., status at a given point of time—a recovery point after a block allocation time). It runs multiple active log segments sudden power-off event. The CP area stores two checkpoint concurrently and appends data and metadata to separate log packs across the two segments (0 and 1): one for the last segments based on their anticipated update frequency. Since stable version and the other for the intermediate (obsolete) the flash storage devices exploit media parallelism, multiple version, alternatively. active segments can run simultaneously without frequent 3. Segment Information Table (SIT): SIT contains persegment management operations, making performance degradation information such as the number of valid blocks and the due to multiple logging (vs. single-segment logging) bitmap for the validity of all blocks in the “Main” area (see insignificant. below). The SIT information is retrieved to select victim 4. Adaptive logging: F2FS builds basically on append-only segments and identify valid blocks in them during the logging to turn random writes into sequential ones. At high cleaning process. storage utilization, however, it changes the logging strategy 4. Node Address Table (NAT): NAT is a block address table to threaded logging to avoid long write latency. In essence, to locate all the “node blocks” stored in the Main area. threaded logging writes new data to free space in a dirty 5. Segment Summary Area (SSA): SSA stores summary segment without cleaning it in the foreground. This strategy entries representing the owner information of all blocks in works well on modern flash devices but may not do so on the Main area, such as parent inode number and its HDDs. node/data offsets. The SSA entries identify parent node 5. fsync acceleration with roll-forward recovery: F2FS blocks before migrating valid blocks during cleaning. optimizes small synchronous writes to reduce the latency of 6. Main Area: Main Area is filled with 4KB blocks. Each fsync requests, by minimizing required metadata writes and block is allocated and typed to be node or data. A node recovering synchronized data with an efficient roll-forward block contains inode or indices of data blocks, while a data mechanism. block contains either directory or user file data. Note that a section does not store data and node blocks simultaneously. II. PROBLEM DEFINITION Comparison between the performances of cleaning policies of the log structured file systems i.e. NILFS and F2FS. By taking throughput into consideration, compile-bench tool is used for Figure 5: On Disk Layout of LFS comparison. III. SURVEY WITH CRITICAL ANALYSIS A. Cleaning in F2FS: Cleaning is a process to reclaim scattered and invalidated blocks, and secures free segments for further logging. Because cleaning occurs constantly once the underlying storage capacity has been filled up, limiting the costs related with cleaning is extremely important for the sustained performance of F2FS. In F2FS, cleaning is done in the unit of a section. F2FS performs cleaning in two distinct manners, foreground and background. Foreground cleaning is triggered only when there are not enough free sections, while a kernel thread wakes up periodically to conduct cleaning in background. F2FS uses greedy strategy for Figure 6: File System for F2FS foreground cleaning and it used cost-benefit policy for background cleaning. Design of Flash-Friendly File System(F2FS): The on-disk data structures of F2FS are carefully laid out to match how underlying A whole cleaning process in F2FS can be described as follows: IJTRD | Mar-Apr 2016 Available [email protected] 47 International Journal of Trend in Research and Development, Volume 3(2), ISSN: 2394-9333 www.ijtrd.com 1. Victim Selection: The cleaning process starts first to identify a Instead it uses a heuristic approach to prevent the worst case victim section among non-empty sections. There are two well- scenario. The performance is still significantly better than known policies for victim selection during F2FS cleaning— timestamp for my benchmarks.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CERIAS Tech Report 2017-5 Deceptive Memory Systems by Christopher N
    CERIAS Tech Report 2017-5 Deceptive Memory Systems by Christopher N. Gutierrez Center for Education and Research Information Assurance and Security Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2086 DECEPTIVE MEMORY SYSTEMS ADissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Purdue University by Christopher N. Gutierrez In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy December 2017 Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana ii THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL STATEMENT OF DISSERTATION APPROVAL Dr. Eugene H. Spa↵ord, Co-Chair Department of Computer Science Dr. Saurabh Bagchi, Co-Chair Department of Computer Science Dr. Dongyan Xu Department of Computer Science Dr. Mathias Payer Department of Computer Science Approved by: Dr. Voicu Popescu by Dr. William J. Gorman Head of the Graduate Program iii This work is dedicated to my wife, Gina. Thank you for all of your love and support. The moon awaits us. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Iwould liketothank ProfessorsEugeneSpa↵ord and SaurabhBagchi for their guidance, support, and advice throughout my time at Purdue. Both have been instru­ mental in my development as a computer scientist, and I am forever grateful. I would also like to thank the Center for Education and Research in Information Assurance and Security (CERIAS) for fostering a multidisciplinary security culture in which I had the privilege to be part of. Special thanks to Adam Hammer and Ronald Cas­ tongia for their technical support and Thomas Yurek for his programming assistance for the experimental evaluation. I am grateful for the valuable feedback provided by the members of my thesis committee, Professor Dongyen Xu, and Professor Math­ ias Payer.
    [Show full text]
  • Ext4 File System and Crash Consistency
    1 Ext4 file system and crash consistency Changwoo Min 2 Summary of last lectures • Tools: building, exploring, and debugging Linux kernel • Core kernel infrastructure • Process management & scheduling • Interrupt & interrupt handler • Kernel synchronization • Memory management • Virtual file system • Page cache and page fault 3 Today: ext4 file system and crash consistency • File system in Linux kernel • Design considerations of a file system • History of file system • On-disk structure of Ext4 • File operations • Crash consistency 4 File system in Linux kernel User space application (ex: cp) User-space Syscalls: open, read, write, etc. Kernel-space VFS: Virtual File System Filesystems ext4 FAT32 JFFS2 Block layer Hardware Embedded Hard disk USB drive flash 5 What is a file system fundamentally? int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { int fd; char buffer[4096]; struct stat_buf; DIR *dir; struct dirent *entry; /* 1. Path name -> inode mapping */ fd = open("/home/lkp/hello.c" , O_RDONLY); /* 2. File offset -> disk block address mapping */ pread(fd, buffer, sizeof(buffer), 0); /* 3. File meta data operation */ fstat(fd, &stat_buf); printf("file size = %d\n", stat_buf.st_size); /* 4. Directory operation */ dir = opendir("/home"); entry = readdir(dir); printf("dir = %s\n", entry->d_name); return 0; } 6 Why do we care EXT4 file system? • Most widely-deployed file system • Default file system of major Linux distributions • File system used in Google data center • Default file system of Android kernel • Follows the traditional file system design 7 History of file system design 8 UFS (Unix File System) • The original UNIX file system • Design by Dennis Ritche and Ken Thompson (1974) • The first Linux file system (ext) and Minix FS has a similar layout 9 UFS (Unix File System) • Performance problem of UFS (and the first Linux file system) • Especially, long seek time between an inode and data block 10 FFS (Fast File System) • The file system of BSD UNIX • Designed by Marshall Kirk McKusick, et al.
    [Show full text]
  • CS 152: Computer Systems Architecture Storage Technologies
    CS 152: Computer Systems Architecture Storage Technologies Sang-Woo Jun Winter 2019 Storage Used To be a Secondary Concern Typically, storage was not a first order citizen of a computer system o As alluded to by its name “secondary storage” o Its job was to load programs and data to memory, and disappear o Most applications only worked with CPU and system memory (DRAM) o Extreme applications like DBMSs were the exception Because conventional secondary storage was very slow o Things are changing! Some (Pre)History Magnetic core memory Rope memory (ROM) 1960’s Drum memory 1950~1970s 72 KiB per cubic foot! 100s of KiB (1024 bits in photo) Hand-woven to program the 1950’s Apollo guidance computer Photos from Wikipedia Some (More Recent) History Floppy disk drives 1970’s~2000’s 100 KiBs to 1.44 MiB Hard disk drives 1950’s to present MBs to TBs Photos from Wikipedia Some (Current) History Solid State Drives Non-Volatile Memory 2000’s to present 2010’s to present GB to TBs GBs Hard Disk Drives Dominant storage medium for the longest time o Still the largest capacity share Data organized into multiple magnetic platters o Mechanical head needs to move to where data is, to read it o Good sequential access, terrible random access • 100s of MB/s sequential, maybe 1 MB/s 4 KB random o Time for the head to move to the right location (“seek time”) may be ms long • 1000,000s of cycles! Typically “ATA” (Including IDE and EIDE), and later “SATA” interfaces o Connected via “South bridge” chipset Ding Yuan, “Operating Systems ECE344 Lecture 11: File
    [Show full text]
  • Filesystem Considerations for Embedded Devices ELC2015 03/25/15
    Filesystem considerations for embedded devices ELC2015 03/25/15 Tristan Lelong Senior embedded software engineer Filesystem considerations ABSTRACT The goal of this presentation is to answer a question asked by several customers: which filesystem should you use within your embedded design’s eMMC/SDCard? These storage devices use a standard block interface, compatible with traditional filesystems, but constraints are not those of desktop PC environments. EXT2/3/4, BTRFS, F2FS are the first of many solutions which come to mind, but how do they all compare? Typical queries include performance, longevity, tools availability, support, and power loss robustness. This presentation will not dive into implementation details but will instead summarize provided answers with the help of various figures and meaningful test results. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. Block devices 3. Available filesystems 4. Performances 5. Tools 6. Reliability 7. Conclusion Filesystem considerations ABOUT THE AUTHOR • Tristan Lelong • Embedded software engineer @ Adeneo Embedded • French, living in the Pacific northwest • Embedded software, free software, and Linux kernel enthusiast. 4 Introduction Filesystem considerations Introduction INTRODUCTION More and more embedded designs rely on smart memory chips rather than bare NAND or NOR. This presentation will start by describing: • Some context to help understand the differences between NAND and MMC • Some typical requirements found in embedded devices designs • Potential filesystems to use on MMC devices 6 Filesystem considerations Introduction INTRODUCTION Focus will then move to block filesystems. How they are supported, what feature do they advertise. To help understand how they compare, we will present some benchmarks and comparisons regarding: • Tools • Reliability • Performances 7 Block devices Filesystem considerations Block devices MMC, EMMC, SD CARD Vocabulary: • MMC: MultiMediaCard is a memory card unveiled in 1997 by SanDisk and Siemens based on NAND flash memory.
    [Show full text]
  • State-Of-The-Art Garbage Collection Policies for NILFS2
    State-of-the-art Garbage Collection Policies for NILFS2 DIPLOMARBEIT zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Diplom-Ingenieur im Rahmen des Studiums Software Engineering/Internet Computing eingereicht von Andreas Rohner, Bsc Matrikelnummer 0502196 an der Fakultät für Informatik der Technischen Universität Wien Betreuung: Ao.Univ.Prof. Dipl.-Ing. Dr.techn. M. Anton Ertl Wien, 23. Jänner 2018 Andreas Rohner M. Anton Ertl Technische Universität Wien A-1040 Wien Karlsplatz 13 Tel. +43-1-58801-0 www.tuwien.ac.at State-of-the-art Garbage Collection Policies for NILFS2 DIPLOMA THESIS submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Diplom-Ingenieur in Software Engineering/Internet Computing by Andreas Rohner, Bsc Registration Number 0502196 to the Faculty of Informatics at the TU Wien Advisor: Ao.Univ.Prof. Dipl.-Ing. Dr.techn. M. Anton Ertl Vienna, 23rd January, 2018 Andreas Rohner M. Anton Ertl Technische Universität Wien A-1040 Wien Karlsplatz 13 Tel. +43-1-58801-0 www.tuwien.ac.at Erklärung zur Verfassung der Arbeit Andreas Rohner, Bsc Grundsteingasse 43/22 Hiermit erkläre ich, dass ich diese Arbeit selbständig verfasst habe, dass ich die verwen- deten Quellen und Hilfsmittel vollständig angegeben habe und dass ich die Stellen der Arbeit – einschließlich Tabellen, Karten und Abbildungen –, die anderen Werken oder dem Internet im Wortlaut oder dem Sinn nach entnommen sind, auf jeden Fall unter Angabe der Quelle als Entlehnung kenntlich gemacht habe. Wien, 23. Jänner 2018 Andreas Rohner v Danksagung Ich danke meinem Betreuer Ao.Univ.Prof. Dipl.-Ing. Dr.techn. M. Anton Ertl für seine Geduld und Unterstützung. Außerdem schulde ich Ryusuke Konishi, dem Maintainer des NILFS2-Subsystems im Linux-Kernel, Dank für die Durchsicht meiner Patches und die vielen wertvollen Verbesserungsvorschläge.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ongoing Evolution of Ext4 File System
    The Ongoing Evolution of Ext4 file system New features and Performance Enhancements Red Hat Luk´aˇsCzerner October 24, 2011 Copyright © 2011 Luk´aˇsCzerner, Red Hat. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the COPYING file. Part I Statistics Agenda 1 Who works on Ext4? 2 Lines of code Who works on Ext4? Agenda 1 Who works on Ext4? 2 Lines of code Who works on Ext4? Last year of Ext4 development 250 non merge changes from 72 developers 9 developers has at least 10 commits 8512 lines of code inserted 5675 lined of code deleted Who works on Ext4? Comparison with other local file systems File system Number of commits Developers Developers* Ext4 250 72 9 Ext3 95 34 2 Xfs 294 34 4 Btrfs 506 60 11 550 Number of commits 500 Developers 450 400 350 300 250 Duration [s] 200 150 100 50 0 EXT3 EXT4 XFS BTRFS File system Lines of code Agenda 1 Who works on Ext4? 2 Lines of code Lines of code Development of the number of lines 80000 Ext3 Xfs Ext4 70000 Btrfs 60000 50000 40000 Lines of code 30000 20000 10000 01/01/05 01/01/06 01/01/07 01/01/08 01/01/09 01/01/10 01/01/11 01/01/12 Part II What's new in Ext4? Agenda 3 Faster file system creation 4 Discard support 5 Support for file systems beyond 16TB 6 Punch hole support 7 Scalability improvements 8 Clustered allocation Faster file system creation
    [Show full text]
  • NOVA: the Fastest File System for Nvdimms
    NOVA: The Fastest File System for NVDIMMs Steven Swanson, UC San Diego XFS F2FS NILFS EXT4 BTRFS © 2017 SNIA Persistent Memory Summit. All Rights Reserved. Disk-based file systems are inadequate for NVMM Disk-based file systems cannot 1-Sector 1-Block N-Block 1-Sector 1-Block N-Block Atomicity overwrit overwrit overwrit append append append exploit NVMM performance e e e Ext4 ✓ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ wb Ext4 ✓ ✓ ✗ ✓ ✗ ✓ Performance optimization Order Ext4 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✗ ✓ compromises consistency on Dataj system failure [1] Btrfs ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✗ ✓ xfs ✓ ✓ ✗ ✓ ✗ ✓ Reiserfs ✓ ✓ ✗ ✓ ✗ ✓ [1] Pillai et al, All File Systems Are Not Created Equal: On the Complexity of Crafting Crash-Consistent Applications, OSDI '14. © 2017 SNIA Persistent Memory Summit. All Rights Reserved. BPFS SCMFS PMFS Aerie EXT4-DAX XFS-DAX NOVA M1FS © 2017 SNIA Persistent Memory Summit. All Rights Reserved. Previous Prototype NVMM file systems are not strongly consistent DAX does not provide data ATomic Atomicity Metadata Data Snapshot atomicity guarantee Mmap [1] So programming is more BPFS ✓ ✓ [2] ✗ ✗ difficult PMFS ✓ ✗ ✗ ✗ Ext4-DAX ✓ ✗ ✗ ✗ Xfs-DAX ✓ ✗ ✗ ✗ SCMFS ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ Aerie ✓ ✗ ✗ ✗ © 2017 SNIA Persistent Memory Summit. All Rights Reserved. Ext4-DAX and xfs-DAX shortcomings No data atomicity support Single journal shared by all the transactions (JBD2- based) Poor performance Development teams are (rightly) “disk first”. © 2017 SNIA Persistent Memory Summit. All Rights Reserved. NOVA provides strong atomicity guarantees 1-Sector 1-Sector 1-Block 1-Block N-Block N-Block Atomicity Atomicity Metadata Data Mmap overwrite append overwrite append overwrite append Ext4 ✓ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ BPFS ✓ ✓ ✗ wb Ext4 ✓ ✓ ✗ ✓ ✗ ✓ PMFS ✓ ✗ ✗ Order Ext4 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✗ ✓ Ext4-DAX ✓ ✗ ✗ Dataj Btrfs ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✗ ✓ Xfs-DAX ✓ ✗ ✗ xfs ✓ ✓ ✗ ✓ ✗ ✓ SCMFS ✗ ✗ ✗ Reiserfs ✓ ✓ ✗ ✓ ✗ ✓ Aerie ✓ ✗ ✗ © 2017 SNIA Persistent Memory Summit. All Rights Reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • I/O Stack Optimization for Smartphones
    I/O Stack Optimization for Smartphones Sooman Jeong1, Kisung Lee2,*, Seongjin Lee1, Seoungbum Son2,*, and Youjip Won1 1 Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea 2Samsung Electronics, Suwon, Korea Abstract ing devices for a variety of applications, including so- The Android I/O stack consists of elaborate and mature cial network services, games, cameras, camcorders, mp3 components (SQLite, the EXT4 filesystem, interrupt- players, and web browsers. driven I/O, and NAND-based storage) whose integrated The application performance of a smartphone is not behavior is not well-orchestrated, which leaves a sub- governed by the speed of its airlink, e.g., Wi-Fi, but stantial room for an improvement. We overhauled the rather by the storage performance, which is currently uti- block I/O behavior of five filesystems (EXT4, XFS, lized in a quite inefficient manner [11]. Furthermore, BTRFS, NILFS, and F2FS) under each of the five dif- one of the main sources of this inefficiency is an ex- ferent journaling modes of SQLite. We found that the cessive I/O activity caused by uncoordinated interac- most significant inefficiency originates from the fact that tions between EXT4 journaling and SQLite journaling filesystem journals the database journaling activity; we [14]. Despite its significant implications for the overall refer to this as the JOJ (Journaling of Journal) anomaly. smartphone performance, the I/O subsystem behavior of The JOJ overhead compounds in EXT4 when the bulky smartphones has not been studied nearly as thoroughly as EXT4 journaling activity is triggered by an fsync() call those in enterprise servers [26, 23], web servers [4, 10], from SQLite.
    [Show full text]
  • Android Boot Optimization on Dra7xx Devices (Rev. A)
    Application Report SPRAC30A–January 2016–Revised February 2018 Android Boot Optimization on DRA7xx Devices ABSTRACT Boot time optimizations are critical for achieving the perception of immediate application availability in the Automotive Infotainment system. They impact the end user's experience by improving the launch time of applications and infotainment use-cases. This application report captures the details on how to optimize Android software stack, along with a few optional early infotainment system features, and is meant to be used as a reference guide. The end product owner (OEM/ODM/Customer) can review the guidance for improving boot time for their specific Android powered system. Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 2 2 Build Instructions............................................................................................................. 3 3 Deploying Instructions....................................................................................................... 5 4 Tooling/Profiling .............................................................................................................. 6 5 Optimization Steps........................................................................................................... 7 6 Adding Early Infotainment (IVI) Features to the Android System ..................................................... 8 7 Recommended Userspace Optimizations ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • (12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 9,460,110 B2 Klughart (45) Date of Patent: *Oct
    USOO946O11 OB2 (12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 9,460,110 B2 Klughart (45) Date of Patent: *Oct. 4, 2016 (54) FILE SYSTEM EXTENSION SYSTEMAND 13/287 (2013.01); G06F 13/37 (2013.01); METHOD G06F 13/385 (2013.01); G06F 13/409 (2013.01); G06F 13/4068 (2013.01); G06F (71) Applicant: Kevin Mark Klughart, Denton, TX 13/4072 (2013.01); G06F 13/4234 (2013.01); (US) G06F 13/4247 (2013.01); G06F 3/0607 (2013.01); G06F 3/0658 (2013.01); G06F (72) Inventor: Kevin Mark Klughart, Denton, TX 2212/262 (2013.01); G06F 2213/0032 (US) (2013.01); G06F 22 13/28 (2013.01); G06F 2213/3802 (2013.01) (*) Notice: Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this (58) Field of Classification Search patent is extended or adjusted under 35 CPC ... G06F 3/0607; G06F 3/0689; G06F 13/00; U.S.C. 154(b) by 0 days. GO6F 13/409 This patent is Subject to a terminal dis- See application file for complete search history. claimer. (56) References Cited (21) Appl. No.: 14/886,616 U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS (22) Filed: Oct. 19, 2015 4,873,665 A 10/1989 Jiang et al. 5,164,613 A 11/1992 Mumper et al. (65) Prior Publication Data (Continued) US 2016/OO78054 A1 Mar. 17, 2016 OTHER PUBLICATIONS Related U.S. Application Data HCL, ashok.madaan(a)hcl. In SATA Host Controller, pp. 1-2, India. (63) Continuation-in-part of application No. 14/685,439, (Continued) filed on Apr. 13, 2015, now Pat. No. 9,164,946, which is a continuation of application No.
    [Show full text]
  • Filesystem Support for Continuous Snapshotting
    Ottawa Linux Symposium 2007 Discussion Filesystem Support for Continuous Snapshotting Ryusuke Konishi, Koji Sato, Yoshiji Amagai {ryusuke,koji,amagai}@osrg.net NILFS Team, NTT Labs. Agenda ● What is Continuous Snapshotting? ● Continuous Snapshotting Demo ● Brief overview of NILFS filesystem ● Performance ● Kernel issues ● Free Discussion – Applications, other approaches, and so on. June 30, 2007 Copyright (C) NTT 2007 2 What©s Continuous Snapshotting? ● Technique creating number of checkpoints (recovery points) continuously. – can restore files mistakenly overwritten or destroyed even the mis-operation happened a few seconds ago. – need no explicit instruction BEFORE (unexpected) data loss – Instantaneous and automatic creation – No inconvenient limits on the number of recovery points. June 30, 2007 Copyright (C) NTT 2007 3 What©s Continuous Snapshotting? ● Typical backup techniques... – make a few recovery points a day – have a limit on number of recovery points ● e.g. The Vista Shadow Copy (VSS): 1 snapshot a day (by default), up to 64 snapshots, not instant. June 30, 2007 Copyright (C) NTT 2007 4 User©s merits ● Receive full benefit of snapshotting – For general desktop users ● No need to append versions to filename; document folders become cleaner. ● can take the plunge and delete (or overwrite save). ● Possible application to regulatory compliance (i.e. SOX act). – For system administrators and operators ● can help online backup, online data restoration. ● allow rollback to past system states and safer system upgrade. ● Tamper detection or recovery of contaminated hard drives. June 30, 2007 Copyright (C) NTT 2007 5 Continuous Snapshotting Demo (NILFS) ● A realization of Continuous Snapshotting shown through a Browser Interface ● Online Disk Space Reclaiming (NILFSv2) June 30, 2007 Copyright (C) NTT 2007 6 NILFS project ● NILFS(v1) released in Sept, 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • Kernel Versions  Technology Areas  Distributions  Resources
    Status Status of Embedded Kernel Features (July 2009) Tim Bird - CELF AG Chair Outline Kernel Versions Technology Areas Distributions Resources Interesting Stuff in Recent Kernel Versions Kernel Versions Linux v2.6.26 – 13 July 2008 Linux v2.6.27 – 9 Oct 2008 Linux v2.6.28 – 24 Dec 2008 Linux v2.6.29 – 23 Mar 2009 Linux v2.6.30 – 10 June 2009 Linux v2.6.31-rc3 – 14 July 2009 Linux v2.6.26 KGDB Finally, an in-kernel debugger gets mainlined Linux v2.6.27 Ftrace core UBIFS Bits of Linux-tiny Linux v2.6.28 Tracepoints Bits of Linux-tiny Linux v2.6.29 SquashFS BTRFS Kernel mode setting Ability to set graphics mode in kernel Asynchronous Function Calls Linux v2.6.30 TOMOYO security module Integrity measurement Threaded interrupts NILFS Linux v2.6.31-rc3 Ftrace filters kmemleak Technology Areas Technology Areas File Systems System Size Tracing Real-time Security Power Management Bootup Time File Systems SquashFS Compressed, read-only FS Mainlined in 2.6.29 Really nice to finally get into kernel BTRFS Check-pointing log-structured file system Mainlined in 2.6.29, BUT STILL EXPERIMENTAL See http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7308 NILFS NILFS = New Implementation of a Log-Structured FS Continous checkpointing, ability to snapshot Mainlined in 2.6.30 See http://www.nilfs.org/ File Systems Issues Patches of interest: VFAT patent workaround 2 attempts by Andrew Tridgell to work around Microsoft VFAT long-name patent First attempt was controversial, because functionality was lost . New approach preserves functionality http://lwn.net/Articles/339641 VFS-based union mounts See http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/5/18/289 Some log-structured file system is needed for fast mounting Possibly NILFS or BTRFS will fill this role System Size / Memory LZMA support Support for LZMA kernel image compression Still would like to see generic LZMA support in kernel (for e.g.
    [Show full text]