Hi Lars, > I still think this does not belong into the kernel at all. > I may not yet have properly explained why. > Thanks for your information. I tried blkdiscard on my test machine, but unfortunately the underlying block device i used doesn't support discard... (/sys/block/<dev>/queue/discard_max_bytes == 0) However, i think blkscard could work well for SSDs and thinly-provisioned support storage as a workaround.
> This is a lot of stuff to add to the DRBD module, > introducing write protocol incompatibility/protocol version bump. > > For no good reason. > Yes, it is not a mandatory feature, more like a enhancement "convenience patch" for some edge cases. User can choose zeroout/discard devices via drbd tools, in case the storage does not support discard, it will using zeroout instead of only throw an "not support" error to output. Implement this function to drbd also help to sync the status between nodes, convenience for auto deploy or monitor by admin. Also have the possibility to implement a resume broken zeroout/discard in future. And i can understand your concern and any decision, many thanks for your and Philipp's help and review:) Best regards, Nick -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/