linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH, RFC] xfs: batched discard support

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 16 Aug 2009 10:23:31 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Mark Lord <liml@....ca>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, xfs@....sgi.com,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jens.axboe@...cle.com,
	IDE/ATA development list <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] xfs: batched discard support

On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 09:59:32AM -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> Okay, I got Matthews patches updated onto 2.6.31, and fixed the incompatibilities
> between those and the XFS TRIM patch (from Christoph), plus a sector_t printk issue.
>
> My apologies for attachments, but I am attaching the updated Christoph patch,
> as well as my hacked-up forward-port of Matthew's patches.
>
> Not pretty, but they work.  :)
>
> Now.. running Christoph's "xfs trim" on a 4.6GB mostly already-trimmed
> XFS partition gave this for the first time around:

> The problem is, it still issues TRIMs to the LLD one extent at a time.
> Compare this with doing it all in a single TRIM command
> with the wiper.sh script (filesystem unmounted):

I could do a variant which issues a single TRIM, but that would require
us to lock out all other allocations for the time the trim takes.  I'll
hack that up once I get some time.

--
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/