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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 11:15:32 +0500 From: Roman Mamedov <rm@...anrm.net> To: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com> Cc: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@...e.com>, Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>, Ric Wheeler <ricwheeler@...il.com>, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, lsf-pc@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-xfs <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>, linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] More async operations for file systems - async discard? On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 22:01:24 -0500 "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com> wrote: > Consequently, many of the modern devices that claim to support discard > to make us software folks happy (or to satisfy a purchase order > requirements) complete the commands without doing anything at all. > We're simply wasting queue slots. Any example of such devices? Let alone "many"? Where you would issue a full-device blkdiscard, but then just read back old data. I know only one model(PLEXTOR PX-512M6M) of dozens tested, which is peculiar that it ignores trim specifically for the 1st sector of the entire disk. But implying there are "many" which no-op it entirely, seems like imagining the world already works like you would assume it to. -- With respect, Roman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists