From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Woodhouse Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] MMC discard support (was [PATCH 0/7] Discard requests, v2) Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 18:38:41 +0100 Message-ID: <1218908321.3184.249.camel@pmac.infradead.org> References: <20080816190858.4d150ea1@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe To: Pierre Ossman Return-path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:32844 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751486AbYHPRio (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Aug 2008 13:38:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080816190858.4d150ea1@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, 2008-08-16 at 19:08 +0200, Pierre Ossman wrote: > I've cooked up some patches that maps David's new discard requests to > erase operations on MMC and SD cards. I'm not entirely sure these are > something to keep though as I've been unable to see any performance > increase in keeping blocks erased. Do we have any other reason to keep > it? When you fill a file system completely, then delete all files -- then do you see a performance improvement when you subsequently write to it? -- David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre David.Woodhouse@intel.com Intel Corporation