From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] block: implement an unprep function corresponding directly to prep Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2010 21:24:13 +0200 Message-ID: <20100705192413.GA24189@lst.de> References: <1277917264.2839.153.camel@mulgrave.site> <20100701104653O.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> <20100702110343.GA27159@lst.de> <20100705160023S.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100705160023S.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org To: FUJITA Tomonori Cc: hch@lst.de, James.Bottomley@suse.de, snitzer@redhat.com, axboe@kernel.dk, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 04:00:44PM +0900, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > Did you tested my discard branch, right? I tested the patch that you sent out back then. > Wired, I've just got Intel SSD X25-M drives and mkfs.xfs worked well. What codebase were you testing on? Sorry, but curently I'm a bit lost in the maze of patches. I've got both and intel and an OCZ SSD (right now I'm travelling with only access to the OCZ actually) and I'd like to test the latest variant again.