From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Guoqing Jiang <guoqing.jiang@linux.dev>
Cc: song@kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
jens@chianterastutte.eu, linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] raid1: ensure bio doesn't have more than BIO_MAX_VECS sectors
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2021 08:49:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YRYj8A+mDfAQBo/E@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210813060510.3545109-1-guoqing.jiang@linux.dev>
On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 02:05:10PM +0800, Guoqing Jiang wrote:
> From: Guoqing Jiang <jiangguoqing@kylinos.cn>
>
> We can't split bio with more than BIO_MAX_VECS sectors, otherwise the
> below call trace was triggered because we could allocate oversized
> write behind bio later.
>
> [ 8.097936] bvec_alloc+0x90/0xc0
> [ 8.098934] bio_alloc_bioset+0x1b3/0x260
> [ 8.099959] raid1_make_request+0x9ce/0xc50 [raid1]
Which bio_alloc_bioset is this? The one in alloc_behind_master_bio?
In which case I think you want to limit the reduction of max_sectors
to just the write behind case, and clearly document what is going on.
In general the size of a bio only depends on the number of vectors, not
the total I/O size. But alloc_behind_master_bio allocates new backing
pages using order 0 allocations, so in this exceptional case the total
size oes actually matter.
While we're at it: this huge memory allocation looks really deadlock
prone.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-13 7:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-13 6:05 [PATCH] raid1: ensure bio doesn't have more than BIO_MAX_VECS sectors Guoqing Jiang
2021-08-13 7:49 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2021-08-13 8:38 ` Guoqing Jiang
2021-08-14 7:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-14 8:57 ` Ming Lei
2021-08-16 6:27 ` Guoqing Jiang
2021-08-16 7:13 ` Ming Lei
2021-08-16 9:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-16 11:40 ` Ming Lei
2021-08-17 5:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-17 12:32 ` Ming Lei
2021-09-24 15:34 ` Jens Stutte (Archiv)
2021-09-25 23:02 ` Guoqing Jiang
2021-08-13 9:27 ` kernel test robot
2021-08-13 9:27 ` kernel test robot
2021-08-13 10:12 ` kernel test robot
2021-08-13 10:12 ` kernel test robot
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=YRYj8A+mDfAQBo/E@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=guoqing.jiang@linux.dev \
--cc=jens@chianterastutte.eu \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
/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.