linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] loop: Better discard support for block devices

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]

Message-ID: <yq1d0nvqeix.fsf@oracle.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 Feb 2019 21:39:50 -0500
From:   "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
To:     Evan Green <evgreen@...omium.org>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@...omium.org>,
        Martin K Petersen <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Alexis Savery <asavery@...omium.org>,
        Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] loop: Better discard support for block devices


Evan,

> If the backing device for a loop device is a block device, then mirror
> the discard properties of the underlying block device into the loop
> device. While in there, differentiate between REQ_OP_DISCARD and
> REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES, which are different for block devices, but which
> the loop device had just been lumping together.

Bubbling up the queue limits from the backing device is fine. However,
I'm not sure why you are requiring a filesystem to be on a
discard-capable device for REQ_OP_DISCARD to have an effect? Punching a
hole in a file is semantically the same as discarding.

-- 
Martin K. Petersen	Oracle Linux Engineering