On 22 August 2016 at 18:52, Tom Yan wrote:
>
> For the "payload block size" that is "always" 512-byte as per the same
> spec, I don't think we need to concern about it. I think it only
> matters if we want to enable multi-block TRIM payload according to the
> reported limit in IDENTIFY DEVICE data
In that case I see no reason that my suggestion should not be adopted.
Currently speaking (as I mentioned in the commit message) it is
reasonable to decrease it per logical sector size in the TRIM-only
sense as well because of the block layer / bio size limit.
FWIW, as of ACS-4, RANGE LENGTH field
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Tom Yan wrote:
> On 22 August 2016 at 15:04, Shaun Tancheff wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 3:33 AM, Tom Yan wrote:
>>> On 22 August 2016 at 08:31, Tom Yan wrote:
> Since I have no experience with SCT Write Same at all, and neither do
> I own any spinning HD
On 22 August 2016 at 15:04, Shaun Tancheff wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 3:33 AM, Tom Yan wrote:
>> On 22 August 2016 at 08:31, Tom Yan wrote:
>>> As mentioned before, as of the latest draft of ACS-4, nothing about a
>>> larger payload size is mentioned. Conservatively speaking, it sort of
>>
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 3:33 AM, Tom Yan wrote:
> On 22 August 2016 at 08:31, Tom Yan wrote:
>> As mentioned before, as of the latest draft of ACS-4, nothing about a
>> larger payload size is mentioned. Conservatively speaking, it sort of
>
> *payload block size
>
>> means that we are allowing fo
On 22 August 2016 at 08:31, Tom Yan wrote:
> As mentioned before, as of the latest draft of ACS-4, nothing about a
> larger payload size is mentioned. Conservatively speaking, it sort of
*payload block size
> means that we are allowing four 512-byte block payload on 4Kn device
*eight 512-byte-b
As mentioned before, as of the latest draft of ACS-4, nothing about a
larger payload size is mentioned. Conservatively speaking, it sort of
means that we are allowing four 512-byte block payload on 4Kn device
regardless of the reported limit in the IDENTIFY DEVICE data. I am
really not sure if it's
On 08/22/2016 06:23 AM, Shaun Tancheff wrote:
> Correct handling of devices with sector_size other that 512 bytes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shaun Tancheff
> ---
> In the case of a 4Kn device sector_size it is possible to describe a much
> larger DSM Trim than the current fixed default of 512 bytes.
>
Correct handling of devices with sector_size other that 512 bytes.
Signed-off-by: Shaun Tancheff
---
In the case of a 4Kn device sector_size it is possible to describe a much
larger DSM Trim than the current fixed default of 512 bytes.
This patch assumes the minimum descriptor is sector_size and
9 matches
Mail list logo
