From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-lj1-f171.google.com (mail-lj1-f171.google.com [209.85.208.171]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69BB72765D7 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2025 08:43:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.208.171 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1763541800; cv=none; b=Axy3B5dyJIGSyLChQOLvoPIxQaG4EsTrPf2DiqgQKVPNTxgQHLbNhliM7Pm6PF9wQDkw+YX0avkqLG5b9UNGjWvst0pMv+bkrbYintSptK3kG11KV5U8IBjf+2uxlRaLTQ2JkC2nvnMQKfHQqExrC5NvulreUSDVTo+an6/ypD0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1763541800; c=relaxed/simple; bh=bdYyLvIYP1aH94dbshsALIDBnw0PfPRI2/SyDHOEpRY=; h=From:Date:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=asIVzsn3j+62lPeSDPSqI/dbqVksUVaOYDBXIQrz66h5kndRv1hXdF1pck/2wc7ENHlUiqHozINkWE36+R+SoFVeXoEGv0mnCBJBFVIeANTHmQsKctFEVbuGXC8ItGJSjI/fFvu1HLR03ukjn5hRrJ28CmLnQt/bCeGX0Uo3eQ8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=Eszz/DQj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.208.171 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Eszz/DQj" Received: by mail-lj1-f171.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-3761e5287c9so57566061fa.2 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2025 00:43:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1763541796; x=1764146596; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:date:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=INaB9EDIenz4qmIu9d6URvGNxpB4f3VMssLlJTGmYI8=; b=Eszz/DQjigOcFbmeifWCHJ+2cqA0B4d4vhN/Cpeprx0+IjBKYyVPoVe/4J8vZQaqeV 3d29UYNvW5oPs1bNtMRHufePiaTy1DH201YXBm1ZfA1XZ+/vVi+4lyA6D2DG71fdUhBZ 6d8rbI20oll8LxN70j8VDPtgfyNENAs2KK7bZtyKsgfw5eijqFZodNSyxyDjery6rxHf w0Q/+fqMoYWrL0nG+hNt9EPFV0QtwETRqtWHq+sW4GwR7GaL7BhOL9cTvTC4ZyIQj+sB R22Sezo7mamBc0OyNYkhFMAzXTtj0vxyaYUIxcg3bBsWfbUbJ1lLYsbr7YHJIn/78A0C jiog== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1763541796; x=1764146596; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:date:from:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=INaB9EDIenz4qmIu9d6URvGNxpB4f3VMssLlJTGmYI8=; b=d7Y81nCoeKaeel6Igei60sR2twlDfXvSRx8zyEQ5yQNULmy7uIQmwPNBJuXAKGpbWR Re1uUCjWQxNbmXY2cNCKADOqd7R+sxMe7BePWK9rVueKnxBfEHWLPtauxaaDHfC0UdKQ N+HvFaoY/MSByCtidRPFxwYgbKHrljVpjDaAK81b6nwcURUmM1XoFq8Rg5Q9HlETPotM +kXH6bnAb+ZhLZ53kZSdZKTuFIjGe9q9IGStiQk46ZClv11m/eQO4XIp1KEG98LDPtJC alvfLcZurm+l6dTFJvAt67oXqKx+d0ObaDTWyECBYhyIzqou87TDho2n3Z8MVPv7U5/e 9gPg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWFv2Lv5T/u7BCzszRpNP95DLFuE/vb57bFt8B8VqP4QhDclFRWWRFFuCpANorNNT4UAGBbAIn2hQ==@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy514CQQg4I0AxBhwgEFTTlx0lZk7swQzTX/6HxPLCrMle+b0BG YgtDmKe0RenC0fLE3AX1B/RmkW6cEW91KbrVo1cMlg2t7NHP68FkCxwC X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctcFNkR/X3uiuTboO+dwf6e8PScAksXHWOM9jIhmw0xpa4cF6fmpmEBLdQ9A9y vnFUVWPDCVYRbfz16tPGW1+tXAfippP5XYg/0g8RZ5UKf/eQmypkj4umOExqO7MQK1NrdrP/9AM kj8NeKl2Uk6QWjPMonDVl4Yt11S1+q9qj777bv9uHi+M3q9dIcRdOK59R1RiFiiW9QNzJnWxgUj 36KMA1Dt7oXBevqpYd1YVAtwAhRy1cziciELckREgSX0hj/5kbnTQwC5E9b4DsPC7nWUkEAsj5/ nLrVpcstzOdU5Hq1pNwW8lSW/K4VDW2Lo1v3S73EeXMSg7zE0NP6MPAwu9AvpIRIIRv7EWNQtyW dL66h1SQQDtnjD2g8UPuN3E1I6JtZDwnLooGlr+S7fjOu4aQL0mQ2oU7BMvLiLxsbmMXYY1ZUjO GDDa1TaPo9EFv6s2kGhNrb4XHRXNe3iHdUtMR+4ANIaBfgskk7LgU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFPJ30Mh/UuQhQXXD+Y1U03K89TzBiGVqJdMh5JBZoXViEpYNLAH4zmr8rXdLIQpSXMsSJEwg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:325a:b0:372:8d61:c26f with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-37babbc92b5mr58796551fa.11.1763541796102; Wed, 19 Nov 2025 00:43:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from pc636 (host-90-233-212-127.mobileonline.telia.com. [90.233.212.127]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 38308e7fff4ca-37b9ced4abesm37688641fa.31.2025.11.19.00.43.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 19 Nov 2025 00:43:15 -0800 (PST) From: Uladzislau Rezki X-Google-Original-From: Uladzislau Rezki Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2025 09:43:13 +0100 To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Mikulas Patocka , Benjamin Marzinski , Uladzislau Rezki , Alasdair Kergon , DMML , Andrew Morton , Mike Snitzer , LKML Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] dm-ebs: Mark full buffer dirty even on partial write Message-ID: References: <20251117105945.10179-1-urezki@gmail.com> <73556fc8-5fbf-37cb-26b9-7cdb88f69720@redhat.com> <230baa83-cd79-f232-5fb8-1476115e1ae7@redhat.com> <20251119054635.GB19993@lst.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: dm-devel@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20251119054635.GB19993@lst.de> On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 06:46:35AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 06:21:56PM +0100, Mikulas Patocka wrote: > > OK - I accepted Uladzislau's patch. As logical block size and physical > > block size seem to be unreliable, it's better to set the size in dm-ebs. > > logical and physical block size are reliable. Uladzislau just seems > to have a completely broken device that needs fixing, because it will > run into all kinds of other problems otherwise. > Well. LBA is fixed in my case. Just only one format which is 512B. Whereas the I/O can not be performed by using LBAs sizes. It is fixed and bigger. I rely on this: /* * Construct an emulated block size mapping: [] * * : path of the underlying device * : offset in 512 bytes sectors into * : emulated block size in units of 512 bytes exposed to the upper layer * []: underlying block size in units of 512 bytes imposed on the lower layer; * optional, if not supplied, retrieve logical block size from underlying device */ static int ebs_ctr(struct dm_target *ti, unsigned int argc, char **argv) { ... to do RMW. It says if UBS is set, data has to impose to lower layer in sizes of UBS and aligned to UBS. I specify the UBS what my device is capable of reading/writing. The buffer is correctly updated in terms of RMW in UBS window. But it flushes partly leading to I/O errors. I find it wrong. Because i set the desired underlying block size. That is my concern. -- Uladzislau Rezki