Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757130AbYKWH5u (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Nov 2008 02:57:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752012AbYKWH5j (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Nov 2008 02:57:39 -0500 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:60713 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751999AbYKWH5i (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Nov 2008 02:57:38 -0500 Message-ID: <49290CEB.7070509@suse.de> Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 16:57:31 +0900 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080922) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linux Kernel Mailing List , dwmw2@infradead.org, Nick Piggin , Jens Axboe , IDE/ATA development list , Jeff Garzik , Dongjun Shin , chris.mason@oracle.com, Jens Axboe Cc: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: about TRIM/DISCARD support and barriers References: <4928E010.4090801@kernel.org> <4929023C.2060302@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <4929023C.2060302@suse.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1652 Lines: 37 Tejun Heo wrote: > Dongjun, the only doc I can find about ATA TRIM is the following one. > > http://t13.org/Documents/UploadedDocuments/docs2007/e07154r3-Data_Set_Management_Proposal_for_ATA-ACS2.pdf > > And AFAICS this hasn't made into ACS yet. Is this what you guys are > gonna implement and Windows7 is gonna use? Just went over it. Matthew, if ATA trim is gonna be implemented as described in the above document, it will support multiple ranges per command. Dongjun, the above document strikes out all the latency/performance related stuff, which looks like the right move to me. Most of those information can be extracted from access pattern by the device itself and exposing such optimization parameters to outside seldom works well. I'm fairly sure such over complexity will end up being counter-optimization due to different interpretations and executions by different parties (be it harddrive vendors or different filesystems). So, can you please confirm that, what we eventually get is simple TRIM w/ multiple ranges? Which, BTW, makes sense as it's something the device can't infer from the access pattern. Also, if there still is wiggle room, what would be a worthy optimization is to allow TRIM commands to be sent together with other NCQ commands as otherwise the drive will have to drain all other commands to process a TRIM command which will be inefficient. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/