On 03/08/2018 09:22 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
TRIM requests should not need FUA since they're just advisory.
Still, while you argue that TRIM is advisory (which I agree), if it does
nothing, then you've (implicitly) honored FUA (that transaction didn't
affect persistent storage, so you didn't ha
On 08/03/2018 15:45, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 03/08/2018 12:50 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> The NBD spec states that since trim requests can affect disk contents,
>>> then they should allow for FUA semantics just like writes for ensuring
>>> the disk has settled before returning. As bdrv_[co_]pdisca
On 03/08/2018 12:50 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
The NBD spec states that since trim requests can affect disk contents,
then they should allow for FUA semantics just like writes for ensuring
the disk has settled before returning. As bdrv_[co_]pdiscard() does
not (yet?) support a flags argument, we
> The NBD spec states that since trim requests can affect disk contents,
> then they should allow for FUA semantics just like writes for ensuring
> the disk has settled before returning. As bdrv_[co_]pdiscard() does
> not (yet?) support a flags argument, we can't pass FUA down the block
> layer s
The NBD spec states that since trim requests can affect disk contents,
then they should allow for FUA semantics just like writes for ensuring
the disk has settled before returning. As bdrv_[co_]pdiscard() does
not (yet?) support a flags argument, we can't pass FUA down the block
layer stack, and m
