[lkml]   [2009]   [May]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectNew TRIM/UNMAP tree published (2009-05-02)
On Sat, May 02, 2009 at 11:11:50PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > blkdev_issue_discard() and blk_ioctl_discard() has half a page
> > of common (and changing) code, could be done to use a common
> > helper that sets policy about bio allocation sizes and such.
> >
> > Just my $0.017
> Yes, that works nicely. Thanks for the suggestion.

I've pushed out a new git tree:;a=shortlog;h=trim-20090502

Changes since the last version:

- Based on 2.6.30-rc4.
- Dropped the three patches which were already merged.
- Shuffled 'Make DISCARD_BARRIER and DISCARD_NOBARRIER writes instead of
reads' to the front of the queue since it's not controversial and could
be merged earlier.
- Inserted 'Unify blk_ioctl_discard and blkdev_issue_discard' as patch two.
- Updated 'ide: Add support for TRIM' to compile with new IDE code.

Still to do:
- Understand all the changes Bart made to the IDE code; I didn't make all
the changes that he did. I just made it compile for now.
- Dave had some objections to the description of 'Make DISCARD_BARRIER and
DISCARD_NOBARRIER writes instead of reads', but didn't propose replacement
- Figure out what to do about memory allocation.
- Handle error returns from discard_prep.
- Test the new code still works.
- Delve into the latest SCSI spec and see if anything changed in UNMAP

Given the extensive length of the todo list, I shan't send out the mailbomb.

Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-05-03 09:19    [W:0.129 / U:1.856 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site