>>>>> "Sitsofe" == Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@xxxxxxxxx> writes: Sitsofe> So we can see it is really a SATA device that announces discard Sitsofe> correctly and supports discard through WRITE_SAME(16). No, that's the SATA device that announces support for DSM TRIM, and as a result the Linux SATL reports support for WRITE SAME(16) w. the UNMAP bit set and LBPME. Sitsofe> It is the act of passing it through Hyper-V that turned it into Sitsofe> a SCSI device that supports UNMAP (but not WRITE_SAME(16)), Sitsofe> doesn't announce its SCSI conformance number and doesn't Sitsofe> correctly announce which features it supports. Surely in this Sitsofe> case it's reasonable to quirk our way around the problem? No. That's an issue in Hyper-V that'll you'll have to take up with Microsoft. I don't know what their passthrough limitations are for SCSI-ATA translation. Maybe K. Y. has some insight into this? There must be a reason why the VPD page was added and yet the device not flagged as LBPME=1. Many vendors do not support UNMAP/WRITE SAME to DSM TRIM translation. Additionally, many vendors explicitly only whitelist drives that are known to be working correctly. Your drive is an ADATA and therefore very likely to be blacklisted by default by a vendor SATL. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
