[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <x497h6aspj1.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 11:33:22 -0400
From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, achender@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] loop: add discard support for loop devices
Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com> writes:
>> @@ -484,6 +485,29 @@ static int do_bio_filebacked(struct loop_device *lo, struct bio *bio)
>> }
>> }
>>
>> + /*
>> + * We use punch hole to reclaim the free space used by the
>> + * image a.k.a. discard. However we do support discard if
>> + * encryption is enabled, because it may give an attacker
>> + * useful information.
>> + */
>> + if (bio->bi_rw & REQ_DISCARD) {
>> + struct file *file = lo->lo_backing_file;
>> + int mode = FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE | FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE;
>> +
>> + if ((!file->f_op->fallocate) ||
>> + lo->lo_encrypt_key_size) {
>> + ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> + goto out;
>> + }
>> + ret = file->f_op->fallocate(file, mode, pos,
>> + bio->bi_size);
>> + if (unlikely(ret && ret != -EINVAL &&
>> + ret != -EOPNOTSUPP))
>> + ret = -EIO;
>> + goto out;
>> + }
>> +
Seems you missed the bizarre case of configuring a loop device over top
of a block device.
Cheers,
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