From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: OGAWA Hirofumi Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] MMC discard support (was [PATCH 0/7] Discard requests, v2) Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 08:59:11 +0900 Message-ID: <87vdxs7ga8.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> References: <1218299181.26926.88.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <20080816190858.4d150ea1@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> <20080822092448.GC20055@kernel.dk> <20080822131314.23ba745a@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> <20080822112010.GJ20055@kernel.dk> <87abf5ayvw.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> <20080823010255.1b4ad88c@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jens Axboe , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, David Woodhouse To: Pierre Ossman Return-path: Received: from mail.parknet.ad.jp ([210.171.162.6]:59918 "EHLO mail.officemail.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753615AbYHVX7S (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Aug 2008 19:59:18 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080823010255.1b4ad88c@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> (Pierre Ossman's message of "Sat, 23 Aug 2008 01:02:55 +0200") Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Pierre Ossman writes: > On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 23:49:07 +0900 > OGAWA Hirofumi wrote: > >> >> That doesn't have improvement? E.g. it means the results >> >> dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/xxx >> and >> ./discard_all /dev/xxx >> dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/xxx >> >> are same? Or FAT doesn't have? > > I have tried those two and others, and I cannot see any noticeable > difference in performance. Please perform your own tests though as I > might have overlooked something. I see, sounds like erase commands of sd/mmc was ignored. It's interesting results, and I'd like to test and see the detail of it, however, unfortunately I don't have proper devices now. Anyway, thanks for info. -- OGAWA Hirofumi