From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Martin K. Petersen" Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] Add support for SCT Write Same Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 21:18:47 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1470790829-3793-1-git-send-email-shaun@tancheff.com> <1470790829-3793-3-git-send-email-shaun@tancheff.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:36023 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751264AbcHLBTD (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Aug 2016 21:19:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Tom Yan's message of "Thu, 11 Aug 2016 16:46:31 +0800") Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tom Yan Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" , Shaun Tancheff , Shaun Tancheff , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Christoph Hellwig , Tejun Heo , Josh Bingaman >>>>> "Tom" == Tom Yan writes: >> Many drives from different vendors were affected by this. So we'd >> have to make multi block payloads an explicit opt-in like we did for >> discard_zeroes_data. However, given that "big" discards are mainly >> done synchronously when creating filesystems, I am not sure there is >> any real benefit to this. Tom> Probably. Perhaps it could make a difference upon deletion of some Tom> really big files (though the logical sectors used may not be Tom> continuous anyway). Nope. And you've got the bio size limit getting in the way as well. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering