Re: Proposal to improve filesystem/block snapshot interaction

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 10/30/07, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This make me curious, why would t13 want to invent a new command when
> there is already the erase command from CFA?
>
> It's not exactly the same, but close enough that the proposed BIO_HINT_RELEASE
> should probably be mapped to CFA_ERASE (0xc0) on drives that support it:
> http://t13.org/Documents/UploadedDocuments/technical/d97116r1.pdf
>

I'm not sure about the background.
However, it's definitely a sign that passing the deleted block info
to the flash-based storage is useful.

Anyway, BIO_HINT_RELEASE could destroy the content of the blocks
after being passed to the device. I think that other bio should not be
reordered
accross that hint (just like barrier).

Dongjun
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux