Virtualization - Dec 2022 - [PATCH v3] virtio_blk: add VIRTIO_BLK_F_LIFETIME feature support

On 12/5/22 11:36?AM, Alvaro Karsz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> Is this based on some spec? Because it looks pretty odd to me. There
>> can be a pretty wide range of two/three/etc level cells with wildly
>> different ranges of durability. And there's really not a lot of slc
>> for generic devices these days, if any.
> 
> Yes, this is based on the virtio spec
> https://docs.oasis-open.org/virtio/virtio/v1.2/csd01/virtio-v1.2-csd01.html
> section  5.2.6
And where did this come from?

-- 
Jens Axboe

On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 11:53:51AM -0700, Jens Axboe
wrote:
> On 12/5/22 11:36?AM, Alvaro Karsz wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> >> Is this based on some spec? Because it looks pretty odd to me.
There
> >> can be a pretty wide range of two/three/etc level cells with
wildly
> >> different ranges of durability. And there's really not a lot
of slc
> >> for generic devices these days, if any.
> > 
> > Yes, this is based on the virtio spec
> >
https://docs.oasis-open.org/virtio/virtio/v1.2/csd01/virtio-v1.2-csd01.html
> > section  5.2.6
> 
> And where did this come from?

Here's the commit log from the spec:
	In many embedded systems, virtio-blk implementations are
	backed by eMMC or UFS storage devices, which are subject to
	predictable and measurable wear over time due to repeated write
	cycles.

	For such systems, it can be important to be able to track
	accurately the amount of wear imposed on the storage over
	time and surface it to applications. In a native deployments
	this is generally handled by the physical block device driver
	but no such provision is made in virtio-blk to expose these
	metrics for devices where it makes sense to do so.

	This patch adds support to virtio-blk for lifetime and wear
	metrics to be exposed to the guest when a deployment of
	virtio-blk is done over compatible eMMC or UFS storage.

	Signed-off-by: Enrico Granata <egranata at google.com>

Cc Enrico Granata as well.

> -- 
> Jens Axboe
>