From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Jon Derrick <jonathan.derrick@intel.com>
Cc: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, keith.busch@intel.com,
hch@infradead.org, sagi@grimberg.me
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme/scsi: Consider LBA format in IO splitting calculation
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 22:00:26 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170425040025.GA23572@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170425000243.2019-1-jonathan.derrick@intel.com>
On Mon, Apr 24 2017, Jon Derrick wrote:
> The current command submission code uses a sector-based value when
> considering the maximum number of blocks per command. With a
> 4k-formatted namespace and a command exceeding max hardware limits, this
> calculation doesn't split IOs which should be split and fails in the
> nvme layer. This patch fixes that calculation and enables IO splitting
> in these circumstances.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jon Derrick <jonathan.derrick@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/nvme/host/scsi.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/scsi.c b/drivers/nvme/host/scsi.c
> index f49ae27..988da61 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvme/host/scsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/scsi.c
> @@ -1609,7 +1609,7 @@ static int nvme_trans_do_nvme_io(struct nvme_ns *ns, struct sg_io_hdr *hdr,
> struct nvme_command c;
> u8 opcode = (is_write ? nvme_cmd_write : nvme_cmd_read);
> u16 control;
> - u32 max_blocks = queue_max_hw_sectors(ns->queue);
> + u32 max_blocks = queue_max_hw_sectors(ns->queue) >> (ns->lba_shift - 9);
>
> num_cmds = nvme_trans_io_get_num_cmds(hdr, cdb_info, max_blocks);
Patch looks correct to me, as we always consider the hw sectors settings
in units of 512b blocks.
Reviewed-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
--
Jens Axboe
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: axboe@kernel.dk (Jens Axboe)
Subject: [PATCH] nvme/scsi: Consider LBA format in IO splitting calculation
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 22:00:26 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170425040025.GA23572@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170425000243.2019-1-jonathan.derrick@intel.com>
On Mon, Apr 24 2017, Jon Derrick wrote:
> The current command submission code uses a sector-based value when
> considering the maximum number of blocks per command. With a
> 4k-formatted namespace and a command exceeding max hardware limits, this
> calculation doesn't split IOs which should be split and fails in the
> nvme layer. This patch fixes that calculation and enables IO splitting
> in these circumstances.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jon Derrick <jonathan.derrick at intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/nvme/host/scsi.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/scsi.c b/drivers/nvme/host/scsi.c
> index f49ae27..988da61 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvme/host/scsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/scsi.c
> @@ -1609,7 +1609,7 @@ static int nvme_trans_do_nvme_io(struct nvme_ns *ns, struct sg_io_hdr *hdr,
> struct nvme_command c;
> u8 opcode = (is_write ? nvme_cmd_write : nvme_cmd_read);
> u16 control;
> - u32 max_blocks = queue_max_hw_sectors(ns->queue);
> + u32 max_blocks = queue_max_hw_sectors(ns->queue) >> (ns->lba_shift - 9);
>
> num_cmds = nvme_trans_io_get_num_cmds(hdr, cdb_info, max_blocks);
Patch looks correct to me, as we always consider the hw sectors settings
in units of 512b blocks.
Reviewed-by: Jens Axboe <axboe at fb.com>
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-25 4:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-25 0:02 [PATCH] nvme/scsi: Consider LBA format in IO splitting calculation Jon Derrick
2017-04-25 0:02 ` Jon Derrick
2017-04-25 4:00 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2017-04-25 4:00 ` Jens Axboe
2017-04-25 4:27 ` Damien Le Moal
2017-04-25 4:27 ` Damien Le Moal
2017-04-25 4:27 ` Damien Le Moal
2017-04-25 4:32 ` Jens Axboe
2017-04-25 4:32 ` Jens Axboe
2017-04-25 4:43 ` Damien Le Moal
2017-04-25 4:43 ` Damien Le Moal
2017-04-25 4:43 ` Damien Le Moal
2017-04-25 17:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-04-25 17:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-04-25 17:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20170425040025.GA23572@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jonathan.derrick@intel.com \
--cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/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.