| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 09:28:53 -0400 From: Greg Freemyer <greg.freemyer@...il.com> To: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@...hat.com>, "J?rn Engel" <joern@...fs.org>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Linux RAID <linux-raid@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Is TRIM/DISCARD going to be a performance problem? On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:38 PM, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de> wrote: > On Monday May 11, greg.freemyer@...il.com wrote: >> >> And since the mdraid layer is not currently planning to track what has >> been discarded over time, when a re-shape comes along, it will >> effectively un-trim everything and rewrite 100% of the FS. > > You might not call them "plans" exactly, but I have had thoughts > about tracking which part of an raid5 had 'live' data and which were > trimmed. I think that is the only way I could support TRIM, unless > devices guarantee that all trimmed blocks read a zeros, and that seems > unlikely. Neil, Re: raid 5, etc. No FS info/discussion The latest T13 proposed spec I saw explicitly allows reads from trimmed sectors to return non-determinate data in some devices. Their is a per device flag you can read to see if a device does that or not. I think mdraid needs to simply assume all trimmed sectors return non-determinate data. Either that, or simply check that per device flag and refuse to accept a drive that supports returning non-determinate data. Regardless, ignoring reshape, why do you need to track it? ... thinking Oh yes, you will have to track it at least at the stripe level. If p = d1 ^ d2 is not guaranteed to be true due to a stripe discard and p, d1, d2 are all potentially non-determinate all is good at first because who cares that d1 = p ^ d2 is not true for your discarded stripe. d1 is effectively just random data anyway. But as soon as either d1 or d2 is written to, you will need to force the entire stripe back into a determinate state or else you will have unprotected data sitting on that stripe. You can only do that if you know the entire stripe was previously indeterminate, thus you have no option but to track the state of the stripes if dmraid is going to support discards with devices that advertise themselves as returning indeterminate data. So Neil, it looks like you need to move from thoughts about tracking discards to planning to track discards. FYI: I don't know if it just for show, or if people really plan to do it, but I have seen several people build up very high performance raid arrays from SSDs already. Seems that about 8 SSDs maxes out the current group of sata controllers, pci-express, etc. Since SSDs with trim support should be even faster, I suspect these ultra-high performance setups will want to use them. Greg -- Greg Freemyer Head of EDD Tape Extraction and Processing team Litigation Triage Solutions Specialist http://www.linkedin.com/in/gregfreemyer First 99 Days Litigation White Paper - http://www.norcrossgroup.com/forms/whitepapers/99%20Days%20whitepaper.pdf The Norcross Group The Intersection of Evidence & Technology http://www.norcrossgroup.com -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists