From: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
Cc: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>,
Benjamin Marzinski <bmarzins@redhat.com>,
Alasdair Kergon <agk@redhat.com>, DMML <dm-devel@lists.linux.dev>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] dm-ebs: Mark full buffer dirty even on partial write
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2025 14:21:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aSBnXqX9jmoKuv4Y@pc636> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251121072421.GA29754@lst.de>
On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 08:24:21AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 01:08:57PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > Could you please check below? Is the last one is correctly reported?
>
> The latter looks unexpected, but is is becase qemu is not passing through
> the qemu physical_block_size attribute to any of the nvme settings Linux
> interprets as such for NVMe (NVMe doesn't actually have the concept of
> a physical block size, unlike SCSI/ATA):
>
OK, understood and thank you for checking this.
>
> root@testvm:~# nvme id-ns -H /dev/nvme0n1 | grep npw
> npwg : 0
> npwa : 0
> root@testvm:~# nvme id-ns -H /dev/nvme0n1 | grep naw
> nawun : 0
> nawupf : 0
> root@testvm:~# nvme id-ctrl -H /dev/nvme0 | grep awupf
> awupf : 0
>
> but as said multiple times, that should not really matter - the logical
> block size is the granularity of I/O, the physical block size is just
> a performance hint.
>
Right.
As stated in commit message of the patch which is in question. 8K
emulated in qemu device with CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE=y:
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo nvme list
Node Generic SN Model Namespace Usage Format FW Rev
--------------------- --------------------- -------------------- ---------------------------------------- --------- -------------------------- ---------------- --------
/dev/nvme0n1 /dev/ng0n1 foo QEMU NVMe Ctrl 1 8.49 GB / 8.49 GB 8 KiB + 0 B 10.0.6
urezki@pc638:~$ cat bin/dmsetup.sh
#!/bin/bash
lower=/dev/nvme0n1
len=$(blockdev --getsz "$lower")
echo "0 $len ebs $lower 0 1 16" | dmsetup create nvme-8k
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo bin/dmsetup.sh
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo cat /sys/block/nvme0n1/queue/logical_block_size
8192
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo cat /sys/block/nvme0n1/queue/physical_block_size
8192
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo cat /sys/block/dm-0/queue/logical_block_size
512
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo cat /sys/block/dm-0/queue/physical_block_size
8192
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo mkfs.ext4 -F /dev/dm-0
mke2fs 1.47.0 (5-Feb-2023)
/dev/dm-0 contains a ext4 file system
last mounted on Fri Nov 21 12:22:55 2025
Discarding device blocks: done
Creating filesystem with 2072576 4k blocks and 518144 inodes
Filesystem UUID: f71adb05-c020-4406-bc0d-bdb9e5c29af7
Superblock backups stored on blocks:
32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736, 1605632
Allocating group tables: done
Writing inode tables: done
Creating journal (16384 blocks): done
Writing superblocks and filesystem accounting information: mkfs.ext4: Input/output error while writing out and closing file system
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo dmesg | grep -i "i/o"
[ 71.813322] Buffer I/O error on dev dm-0, logical block 10, lost async page write
[ 71.813373] Buffer I/O error on dev dm-0, logical block 11, lost async page write
[ 71.813395] Buffer I/O error on dev dm-0, logical block 12, lost async page write
[ 71.813415] Buffer I/O error on dev dm-0, logical block 13, lost async page write
[ 71.813433] Buffer I/O error on dev dm-0, logical block 14, lost async page write
[ 71.813451] Buffer I/O error on dev dm-0, logical block 15, lost async page write
[ 71.813475] Buffer I/O error on dev dm-0, logical block 16, lost async page write
[ 71.813493] Buffer I/O error on dev dm-0, logical block 17, lost async page write
[ 71.813516] Buffer I/O error on dev dm-0, logical block 18, lost async page write
[ 71.813537] Buffer I/O error on dev dm-0, logical block 19, lost async page write
urezki@pc638:~$
with the patch:
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo nvme list
Node Generic SN Model Namespace Usage Format FW Rev
--------------------- --------------------- -------------------- ---------------------------------------- --------- -------------------------- ---------------- --------
/dev/nvme0n1 /dev/ng0n1 foo QEMU NVMe Ctrl 1 8.49 GB / 8.49 GB 8 KiB + 0 B 10.0.6
urezki@pc638:~$ cat bin/dmsetup.sh
#!/bin/bash
lower=/dev/nvme0n1
len=$(blockdev --getsz "$lower")
echo "0 $len ebs $lower 0 1 16" | dmsetup create nvme-8k
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo bin/dmsetup.sh
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo cat /sys/block/nvme0n1/queue/logical_block_size
8192
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo cat /sys/block/nvme0n1/queue/physical_block_size
8192
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo cat /sys/block/dm-0/queue/logical_block_size
512
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo cat /sys/block/dm-0/queue/physical_block_size
8192
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo mkfs.ext4 -F /dev/dm-0
mke2fs 1.47.0 (5-Feb-2023)
Discarding device blocks: done
Creating filesystem with 2072576 4k blocks and 518144 inodes
Filesystem UUID: c7dff4c7-aa7e-4c94-98ee-f9ea2da92a06
Superblock backups stored on blocks:
32768, 98304, 163840, 229376, 294912, 819200, 884736, 1605632
Allocating group tables: done
Writing inode tables: done
Creating journal (16384 blocks): done
Writing superblocks and filesystem accounting information: done
urezki@pc638:~$ sudo mount /dev/dm-0 /mnt/
urezki@pc638:~$ ls -al /mnt/
total 24
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 Nov 21 12:22 .
drwxr-xr-x 19 root root 4096 Jul 10 19:42 ..
drwx------ 2 root root 16384 Nov 21 12:22 lost+found
urezki@pc638:~$
How do we solve this?
Mikulas proposed to use below patch:
<snip>
Index: linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm-bufio.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/md/dm-bufio.c 2025-10-13 21:42:47.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm-bufio.c 2025-10-20 14:40:32.000000000 +0200
@@ -1374,7 +1374,7 @@ static void submit_io(struct dm_buffer *
{
unsigned int n_sectors;
sector_t sector;
- unsigned int offset, end;
+ unsigned int offset, end, align;
b->end_io = end_io;
@@ -1388,9 +1388,10 @@ static void submit_io(struct dm_buffer *
b->c->write_callback(b);
offset = b->write_start;
end = b->write_end;
- offset &= -DM_BUFIO_WRITE_ALIGN;
- end += DM_BUFIO_WRITE_ALIGN - 1;
- end &= -DM_BUFIO_WRITE_ALIGN;
+ align = max(DM_BUFIO_WRITE_ALIGN, bdev_logical_block_size(b->c->bdev));
+ offset &= -align;
+ end += align - 1;
+ end &= -align;
if (unlikely(end > b->c->block_size))
end = b->c->block_size;
<snip>
and it fixes the setup which i described in the commit message, but i
have question.
Why in dm-ebs we need to offload partial buffer < ubf size?
Thank you for answers!
--
Uladzislau Rezki
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-21 13:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-17 10:59 [RESEND PATCH] dm-ebs: Mark full buffer dirty even on partial write Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2025-11-17 20:48 ` Mikulas Patocka
2025-11-18 11:39 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-18 12:00 ` Mikulas Patocka
2025-11-18 12:40 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-18 12:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-18 14:15 ` Benjamin Marzinski
2025-11-18 17:21 ` Mikulas Patocka
2025-11-19 5:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-19 8:43 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-19 8:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-19 8:57 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-19 9:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-19 9:01 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-19 9:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-19 9:13 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-19 9:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-19 17:26 ` Mikulas Patocka
2025-11-20 6:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-20 12:08 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-20 12:40 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-21 7:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-21 7:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-21 13:21 ` Uladzislau Rezki [this message]
2025-11-21 16:48 ` Benjamin Marzinski
2025-11-24 10:43 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-24 14:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-24 15:30 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-24 17:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-24 18:05 ` Uladzislau Rezki
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-10-14 14:47 Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2025-10-16 19:59 ` Andrew Morton
2025-10-17 15:55 ` Uladzislau Rezki
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=aSBnXqX9jmoKuv4Y@pc636 \
--to=urezki@gmail.com \
--cc=agk@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bmarzins@redhat.com \
--cc=dm-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpatocka@redhat.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.