Re: [PATCH 1/2] fs: Do not dispatch FITRIM through separate super_operation

[Mark Lord]

On 10-11-18 03:04 PM, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> I'm a fan of wiper.sh, but afaik it still cannot address a
> multi-spindle LVM setup, Nor a MDraid setup.  etc.
>
> That's because it bypasses the block stack and talks directly to the
> devices.  Thus it doesn't get the benefit of all the logical to
> physical sector remapping handled via the block stack.
>
> Mark, please correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm a big fan of FITRIM, especially as it should work on MD devices
as well, which are problematic for wiper.sh today.   I originally proposed
FITRIM (without the name, though) back when first implementing wiper.sh,
and I really believe we should extend FITRIM to btrfs and xfs.

hdparm is picking up support for FITRIM in the next release,
and wiper.sh will use it when it can in place of raw TRIMs.

This remains my own preferred method for TRIM:  offline, that is.  :)

Cheers
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/