linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add batched discard support for ext4.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:59:07 -0400
From:	Mark Lord <kernel@...savvy.com>
To:	Greg Freemyer <greg.freemyer@...il.com>
CC:	Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@...hat.com>, sandeen@...hat.com,
	Eric Sandeen <esandeen@...hat.com>,
	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
	Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Edward Shishkin <eshishki@...hat.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add batched discard support for ext4.

On 21/04/10 05:47 PM, Greg Freemyer wrote:
>
> The ATA-8 spec. supports vectored trims and requires a minimum of 255
> sectors worth of range payload be supported.  That equates to a single
> trim being able to trim thousands of ranges in one command.
>
> Mark Lord has benchmarked in found a vectored trim to be drastically
> faster than calling trim individually for each of those ranges.
..

Does anyone have an Intel-based SSD they could spare?  :)

Rumour has it they they do not comply with the ATA-8 spec for TRIM,
in that they don't support more than one "sector" of range data.
The SSDs I have here all support much more than that.

Still, even if we just do a single 512-byte payload of TRIM ranges,
it would be a huge win.

Cheers
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html