From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
To: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>
Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com"
<James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: I/O topology fixes for big physical block size
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 13:23:10 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100927172309.GA13874@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CA0CC38.5010804@fusionio.com>
On Mon, Sep 27 2010 at 12:54pm -0400,
Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com> wrote:
> On 2010-09-28 01:41, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> > Mike Snitzer reported that he has access to a device that supports thin
> > provisioning but does not use the Block Limits VPD page to indicate
> > discard granularity. Instead it reports a huge (1MB) physical block
> > size. That caused a bit of fallout in the topology stack which assumed a
> > physical block size of 4KiB or less.
>
> Fixing the overflow aside, I question the validity of setting the physical
> block size to something larger than PAGE_SIZE as there's no way that that
> could really work in the current kernel.
>
> I would suggest doing something similar as we do with other 'invalid'
> settings that we cannot honor, print a warning and drop the queue
> limits to PAGE_SIZE.
I'm inclined to agree. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
But could this cap of PAGE_SIZE be enforced with a follow-on patch? Or
would you rather see it be dealt with in a single revised 2/2 patch?
Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-27 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-27 16:41 I/O topology fixes for big physical block size Martin K. Petersen
2010-09-27 16:41 ` [PATCH 1/2] block: Ensure physical block size is unsigned int Martin K. Petersen
2010-09-27 17:40 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-10-08 5:15 ` Martin K. Petersen
2010-10-13 19:12 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-10-13 19:15 ` Jens Axboe
2010-09-27 16:41 ` [PATCH 2/2] sd: Fix overflow with big physical blocks Martin K. Petersen
2010-09-27 17:42 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-09-27 18:13 ` [PATCH] block: eliminate potential for infinite loop in blkdev_issue_discard Mike Snitzer
2010-10-14 21:37 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-10-15 11:05 ` Jens Axboe
2010-09-27 16:54 ` I/O topology fixes for big physical block size Jens Axboe
2010-09-27 17:20 ` Martin K. Petersen
2010-09-27 22:21 ` Jens Axboe
2010-09-27 22:36 ` Martin K. Petersen
2010-09-27 23:15 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-09-28 4:30 ` Jens Axboe
2010-09-28 5:20 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-09-28 14:15 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-09-28 20:57 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-09-28 21:24 ` Martin K. Petersen
2010-09-28 21:24 ` Martin K. Petersen
2010-09-28 21:36 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-09-30 16:30 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-09-30 17:07 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-09-30 17:07 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-09-30 17:33 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-10-01 14:24 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-10-01 22:19 ` Martin K. Petersen
2010-10-01 22:19 ` Martin K. Petersen
2010-10-02 2:31 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-10-02 3:03 ` Daniel Taylor
2010-10-04 19:49 ` Martin K. Petersen
2010-10-04 19:49 ` Martin K. Petersen
2010-09-27 17:23 ` Mike Snitzer [this message]
2010-09-27 21:58 ` James Bottomley
2010-09-27 22:03 ` Jens Axboe
2010-09-27 22:14 ` Martin K. Petersen
2010-09-27 22:24 ` Jens Axboe
2010-09-28 18:48 ` Martin K. Petersen
2010-09-28 18:54 ` Mike Snitzer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100927172309.GA13874@redhat.com \
--to=snitzer@redhat.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.