[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f3177b9e0905251026u54d6b1e0s884dbdedf74b17cd@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 11:26:15 -0600
From: Chris Worley <worleys@...il.com>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: RE: zero out blocks of freed user data for operation a virtual
machine environment
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@....de> wrote:
> Thomas Glanzmann <thomas@...nzmann.de> writes:
> > Hello Ted,
> >
> >> Yes, it does, sb_issue_discard(). So if you wanted to hook into this
> >> routine with a function which issued calls to zero out blocks, it
> >> would be easy to create a private patch.
> >
> > that sounds good because it wouldn't only target the most used
> > filesystem but every other filesystem that uses the interface as well.
> > Do you think that a tunable or configurable patch has a chance to hit
> > upstream as well?
> >
> > Thomas
>
> I could imagine a device mapper target that eats TRIM commands and
> writes out zeroes instead. That should be easy to maintain outside or
> inside the upstream kernel source.
Why bother with a time-consuming performance-draining operation?
There are devices that already support TRIM/discard commands today,
and once you discard a block, it's completely irretrievable (you'll
just get back zeros if you try to read that block w/o writing it after
the discard).
Chris
>
>
> MfG
> Goswin
--
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