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:	Tue, 19 Jun 2012 14:48:59 -0400
From:	Mike Snitzer <>
To:	Spelic <>
Cc:	Lukáš Czerner <>,
	device-mapper development <>,, Dave Chinner <>,
Subject: Re: Ext4 and xfs problems in dm-thin on allocation and discard

On Tue, Jun 19 2012 at 10:44am -0400,
Mike Snitzer <> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 19 2012 at  9:52am -0400,
> Spelic <> wrote:
> > I do not know what is the mechanism for which xfs cannot unmap
> > blocks from dm-thin, but it really can't.
> > If anyone has dm-thin installed he can try. This is 100%
> > reproducible for me.
> I was initially surprised by this considering the thinp-test-suite does
> test a compilebench workload against xfs and ext4 using online discard
> (-o discard).
> But I just modified that test to use a thin-pool with 'ignore_discard'
> and the test still passed on both ext4 and xfs.
> So there is more work needed in the thinp-test-suite to use blktrace
> hooks to verify that discards are occuring when the compilebench
> generated files are removed.
> I'll work through that and report back.

blktrace shows discards for both xfs and ext4.

But in general xfs is issuing discards with much smaller extents than
ext4 does, e.g.:

to the thin device:
+ 128 vs + 32

to the thin-pool's data device:
+ 120 vs + 16
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists