On Mon, 16 Feb 2015, James Bottomley wrote: > I already said this in the first sentence of the last paragraph of my > email. The point isn't what it does today it's what might happen > tomorrow and the principle of least surprise. One day, someone might > propagate the error. When that happens, they'll be surprised to find > every discard failure reported as -ENOTSUPP and it will cost someone > time and effort to investigate and fix. If you just propagate the error > today, you save all that work in the future. > > James The question is if this case is so important that it justifies dm-io change. The SSD may ignore discards and report them as sucesfully completed, so no one should depend on the return code anyway. The error code may be used as a hint that it is futile to send more discards in the future, but relying on the return code is already not correct. Mikulas -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
