From: Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@windriver.com>
To: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: absurdly high "optimal_io_size" on Seagate SAS disk
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 11:45:15 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <545BB3AB.8070409@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <yq1k338b5d5.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net>
On 11/06/2014 11:34 AM, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>>>>>> "Chris" == Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@windriver.com> writes:
>
> Chris> Perhaps the ST900MM0026 should be blacklisted as well?
>
> Sure. I'll widen the net a bit for that Seagate model.
That'd work, but is it the best way to go? I mean, I found one report
of a similar problem on an SSD (model number unknown). In that case it
was a near-UINT_MAX value as well.
The problem with the blacklist is that until someone patches it, the
drive is broken. And then it stays blacklisted even if the firmware
gets fixed.
I'm wondering if it might not be better to just ignore all values larger
than X (where X is whatever we think is the largest conceivable
reasonable value).
Chris
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@windriver.com>
To: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: absurdly high "optimal_io_size" on Seagate SAS disk
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 11:45:15 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <545BB3AB.8070409@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <yq1k338b5d5.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net>
On 11/06/2014 11:34 AM, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>>>>>> "Chris" == Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@windriver.com> writes:
>
> Chris> Perhaps the ST900MM0026 should be blacklisted as well?
>
> Sure. I'll widen the net a bit for that Seagate model.
That'd work, but is it the best way to go? I mean, I found one report
of a similar problem on an SSD (model number unknown). In that case it
was a near-UINT_MAX value as well.
The problem with the blacklist is that until someone patches it, the
drive is broken. And then it stays blacklisted even if the firmware
gets fixed.
I'm wondering if it might not be better to just ignore all values larger
than X (where X is whatever we think is the largest conceivable
reasonable value).
Chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-06 17:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-06 16:47 absurdly high "optimal_io_size" on Seagate SAS disk Chris Friesen
2014-11-06 17:16 ` Chris Friesen
2014-11-06 17:16 ` Chris Friesen
2014-11-06 17:34 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-06 17:34 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-06 17:45 ` Chris Friesen [this message]
2014-11-06 17:45 ` Chris Friesen
2014-11-06 18:12 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-06 18:12 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-06 18:15 ` Jens Axboe
2014-11-06 19:14 ` Chris Friesen
2014-11-06 19:14 ` Chris Friesen
2014-11-07 1:56 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-07 1:56 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-07 5:35 ` Chris Friesen
2014-11-07 5:35 ` Chris Friesen
2014-11-07 15:18 ` Dale R. Worley
2014-11-07 16:25 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-07 16:25 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-07 17:42 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-07 17:42 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-07 17:51 ` Chris Friesen
2014-11-07 17:51 ` Chris Friesen
2014-11-07 18:03 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-07 18:03 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-07 18:48 ` Chris Friesen
2014-11-07 18:48 ` Chris Friesen
2014-11-07 19:17 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-07 19:17 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-07 21:04 ` Chris Friesen
2014-11-07 21:04 ` Chris Friesen
2014-11-07 17:10 ` Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
2014-11-07 17:40 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-07 17:40 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-11-07 20:15 ` Douglas Gilbert
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=545BB3AB.8070409@windriver.com \
--to=chris.friesen@windriver.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=snitzer@redhat.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.