|
|
|
Re: do not disable ext4 discards on first discard failure? [was: Re: dm snapshot: ignore discards issued to the snapshot-origin target] | |
| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] | |
On 5/2/11 8:05 AM, Lukas Czerner wrote: > On Mon, 2 May 2011, Mike Snitzer wrote: ... >> The blkdev_issue_discard() change you propose could be fine (mask >> EOPNOTSUPP return if device advertises support for discards) -- though >> Eric said we shouldn't ever say we did something when we didn't. > > Exactly, so we should not say that it is not supported when it is, but > we just hit the "wrong" part of the device:) I would just very much like > to keep the abstraction of having one consistent device underneath the > file system and not deal with several devices, or regions with different > behaviour in the file system itself (let the pixies underneath deal with > that, after all not all of us are btrfs:)) I still think we need to stick with the simple rule: "EOPNOTSUPP returned for a particular bio means that it is not supported for that particular bio" - I don't know what else we can do, without creating an ambiguity... This does, however, suck for the layer calling in to a complex device. What is the overhead for sending discard bios down to a device that does not support it? -Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Reiser Filesystem Development] [Kernel Newbies] [Share Photos] [Security] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Linux FS] [Photo] [Yosemite] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Samba] [Video 4 Linux] [Device Mapper] [Linux Resources]
![]() |