Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/30] DRBD updates | From | Jens Axboe <> | Date | Mon, 13 Jun 2016 09:11:46 -0600 |
| |
On 06/13/2016 08:08 AM, Philipp Reisner wrote: > Hi Jens, > > I have sent this already on April 25, I guess it was too late in the cycle > at that time. Apart from the usual maintenance and bug fixes this time comes > support for WRITE_SAME and lots of improvements for DISCARD. > > At that time we had a discussion about (1) the all_zero() heuristic introduced > with [PATCH 04/30] drbd: Implement handling of thinly provisioned storage... > not being efficient, and about the (2) rs-discard-granularity configuration > parameter. > > Regarding (1): I intend to work on block-devices being able to export their > allocation map by either FIEMAP or SEEK_HOLE/SEEK_DATA or both for the next > cycle. The I will change DRBD to use that as well. > > Regarding (2): We need to announce the discard granularity when we create the > device/minor. At might it might be that there is no connection to the peer > node. So we are left with information about the discard granularity of the > local backing device only. Therefore we decided to delegate it to the > user/admin to provide the discard granularity for the resync process. > > > Please add it to your for-4.8/drivers branch.
If you want me to add it to that branch (which is where it should go), then why aren't the patches against that branch? I get rejects on several of the patches, mainly because they are not done on top of this particular branch.
We can do two things here. I can skip patches, I don't like doing that. Or you can respin against the proper branch, as it should have been from the beginning. What do you want to do?
-- Jens Axboe
| |