From: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
To: Kent Overstreet <kmo@daterainc.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: next bio iters break discard?
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 23:06:33 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <yq161pnmcl2.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140114023346.GN9037@kmo> (Kent Overstreet's message of "Mon, 13 Jan 2014 18:33:46 -0800")
>>>>> "Kent" == Kent Overstreet <kmo@daterainc.com> writes:
Kent,
Kent> I think for discards we can deal with this easily enough -
Kent> __blk_recalc_rq_segments() will have to special case them - but
Kent> there's a similar (but worse) issue with WRITE_SAME, and looking
Kent> at the code it does attempt to merge WRITE_SAME requests too.
DISCARD bios have no payload going down the stack. They get a payload
attached in the sd driver and will therefore have a single bvec at
completion time.
WRITE_SAME bios have a single bvec payload throughout their lifetime.
For both these types of requests we never attempt to merge the actual
payloads. But the block range worked on may shrink or grow as the bio is
split or merged going down the stack.
IOW, DISCARD, WRITE SAME and the impending COPY requests do not have a
1:1 mapping between the block range worked on and the size of any bvecs
attached. Your recent changes must have changed the way we handled that
in the past.
I'll take a look tomorrow...
--
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-14 4:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-13 3:52 next bio iters break discard? Hugh Dickins
2014-01-14 2:33 ` Kent Overstreet
2014-01-14 4:06 ` Martin K. Petersen [this message]
2014-01-14 4:48 ` Kent Overstreet
2014-01-14 20:17 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-01-14 22:24 ` Kent Overstreet
2014-01-16 1:39 ` Martin K. Petersen
2014-01-16 20:21 ` Hugh Dickins
2014-01-17 1:06 ` Kent Overstreet
2014-01-17 1:21 ` Kent Overstreet
2014-01-31 17:17 ` Hugh Dickins
2014-01-31 21:58 ` Jens Axboe
2014-02-04 10:17 ` [PATCH] block: Explicitly handle discard/write same segments Kent Overstreet
2014-02-04 12:25 ` Hugh Dickins
2014-02-04 12:35 ` Kent Overstreet
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=yq161pnmcl2.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net \
--to=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kmo@daterainc.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shli@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.