Greg Freemyer wrote: > On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 04/24/2010 09:24 AM, Greg Freemyer wrote: ... >>> I know I've been arguing against this patch for the single SSD case >>> and I still think that use case should be handled by userspace as >>> hdparm/wiper.sh currently does. In particular for those extreme >>> scenarios with JBOD SSDs, the user space solution wins because it >>> knows how to optimize the trim calls via vectorized ranges in the >>> payload. >>> >> I think that you have missed the broader point. This is not on by default, >> so you can mount without discard and use whatever user space utility you >> like at your discretion. >> >> ric > > Ric, > > I was trying to say the design should be driven by the large discard > range use case, not the potentially pathological small discard range > use case that would only benefit SSDs. > > Greg Bear in mind that this patch makes the discard range requests substantially -larger- than what mount -o discard does on ext4 today, in fact that was a main goal. If the kernel could assemble vectors of ranges and pass them down, I think it could be extended to use that as well. -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
