[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49FE208E.7070001@garzik.org>
Date: Sun, 03 May 2009 18:54:06 -0400
From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
CC: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...hat.com>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>,
Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: New TRIM/UNMAP tree published (2009-05-02)
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> (3) when creating a discard request, use block helpers w/ queue-specific
>> knowledge to create either
>> (a) one request, REQ_TYPE_FS, with discard flag or
>> (b) two requests, REQ_TYPE_FS followed by REQ_TYPE_DISCARD
>
> I'm not sure we need option 3b.
Well -- it is a hard requirement to map 1:1 struct request with the
underlying hardware device's command set.
If a device command set lacks a READ-and-DISCARD operation, then you
_must_ create two struct request. Otherwise you break block layer
tagging and other 1:1-based assumptions that exist today.
Thus, given that all of ATA|SCSI|NVMHCI have a DISCARD operation
distinct from other commands...
option 3b is the overwhelming common case.
Jeff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists