From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754419Ab0F3MS7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:18:59 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:15566 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751760Ab0F3MS5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:18:57 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:18:20 -0400 From: Mike Snitzer To: Boaz Harrosh Cc: Christoph Hellwig , James Bottomley , axboe@kernel.dk, dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, martin.petersen@oracle.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, FUJITA Tomonori Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: fix leaks associated with discard request payload Message-ID: <20100630121820.GB22798@redhat.com> References: <20100622180029.GA15950@redhat.com> <1277582211-10725-1-git-send-email-snitzer@redhat.com> <1277652576.4366.19.camel@mulgrave.site> <4C2B012B.2000407@panasas.com> <20100630084204.GA27609@lst.de> <4C2B1B7D.2090607@panasas.com> <20100630104155.GA1370@lst.de> <4C2B2318.1030107@panasas.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C2B2318.1030107@panasas.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 30 2010 at 6:57am -0400, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > On 06/30/2010 01:41 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 01:25:01PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > >> OK, Thanks, I see. Is it one of these operations, (like we have in OSD) where > >> the CDB information spills into the payload? like the scatter-gather and extent > >> lists and such. > > > > For UNMAP the payload is a list of block number / length pairs, while > > the CDB itself doesn't contain any information like that. It's a rather > > awkward command. > > > > How big can that be? could we, maybe, use the sense_buffer, properly allocated > already? > > >> Do we actually use a WRITE_SAME which is not zero? for what use? > > > > The kernel doesn't issue any WRITE SAME without the unmap bit set. > > So if the unmap bit is set then the page can just be zero, right? > > I still think a static zero-page is a worth while optimization. And > block-drivers can take care with special needs with a private mem_pool > or something. For the discard-type user and generic block layer the > page is just an implementation specific residue, No? Why should the block layer have any role in managing this page? Block layer doesn't care about it, SCSI does. Mike