On 29/04/2016 06:00, Rafael David Tinoco wrote: > Actually, It was an objection. > > Knowing that WRITESAME(16), used as the discard mechanism, can cause > storage servers to misbehave (like QEMU's SCSI WRITESAME > implementation, workaround-ed by commit e461338b6cd4) and those > storage servers can't rely on LBPRZ flag to opt out from WRITESAME as > discard mechanism (like QEMU does) since it is out of spec...
I think e461338b6cd4 is a perfectly fine change---independent of whether it's a workaround for QEMU---and should be backported to stable kernels too. Is there a reason to use WRITE SAME if LBPRZ=0? You risk doing a real write which breaks thin provisioning and will probably take a huge time too. Paolo
