Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760665Ab0KRVmT (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Nov 2010 16:42:19 -0500 Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.183]:48963 "EHLO ironport2-out.pppoe.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757165Ab0KRVmQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Nov 2010 16:42:16 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApIBAMIr5UxLd/sX/2dsb2JhbAAHgz3OV5B2gSKDNnMEhFqLEA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,218,1288584000"; d="scan'208";a="82908159" Message-ID: <4CE59DB6.9090304@teksavvy.com> Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 16:42:14 -0500 From: Mark Lord User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Freemyer CC: James Bottomley , Jeff Moyer , Christoph Hellwig , Matthew Wilcox , Josef Bacik , Lukas Czerner , tytso@mit.edu, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, sandeen@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fs: Do not dispatch FITRIM through separate super_operation References: <1290065809-3976-1-git-send-email-lczerner@redhat.com> <20101118130630.GJ6178@parisc-linux.org> <20101118134804.GN5618@dhcp231-156.rdu.redhat.com> <20101118141957.GK6178@parisc-linux.org> <20101118142918.GA18510@infradead.org> <1290100750.3041.72.camel@mulgrave.site> <1290102098.3041.77.camel@mulgrave.site> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1123 Lines: 27 On 10-11-18 03:04 PM, Greg Freemyer wrote: > > I'm a fan of wiper.sh, but afaik it still cannot address a > multi-spindle LVM setup, Nor a MDraid setup. etc. > > That's because it bypasses the block stack and talks directly to the > devices. Thus it doesn't get the benefit of all the logical to > physical sector remapping handled via the block stack. > > Mark, please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm a big fan of FITRIM, especially as it should work on MD devices as well, which are problematic for wiper.sh today. I originally proposed FITRIM (without the name, though) back when first implementing wiper.sh, and I really believe we should extend FITRIM to btrfs and xfs. hdparm is picking up support for FITRIM in the next release, and wiper.sh will use it when it can in place of raw TRIMs. This remains my own preferred method for TRIM: offline, that is. :) Cheers -- 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/