From: Keith Busch <kbusch@meta.com>
To: <axboe@kernel.dk>, <hch@lst.de>, <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
<linux-block@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>, <sagi@grimberg.me>
Cc: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCHv4 03/10] blk-integrity: properly account for segments
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2024 13:12:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240911201240.3982856-4-kbusch@meta.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240911201240.3982856-1-kbusch@meta.com>
From: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Both types of merging when integrity data is used are miscounting the
segments:
Merging two requests wasn't accounting for the new segment count, so add
the "next" segment count to the first on a successful merge to ensure
this value is accurate.
Merging a bio into an existing request was double counting the bio's
segments, even if the merge failed later on. Move the segment accounting
to the end when the merge is successful.
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
---
block/blk-integrity.c | 2 --
block/blk-merge.c | 4 ++++
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-integrity.c b/block/blk-integrity.c
index 010decc892eaa..afd101555d3cb 100644
--- a/block/blk-integrity.c
+++ b/block/blk-integrity.c
@@ -153,8 +153,6 @@ bool blk_integrity_merge_bio(struct request_queue *q, struct request *req,
q->limits.max_integrity_segments)
return false;
- req->nr_integrity_segments += nr_integrity_segs;
-
return true;
}
diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
index 56769c4bcd799..ad763ec313b6a 100644
--- a/block/blk-merge.c
+++ b/block/blk-merge.c
@@ -639,6 +639,9 @@ static inline int ll_new_hw_segment(struct request *req, struct bio *bio,
* counters.
*/
req->nr_phys_segments += nr_phys_segs;
+ if (bio_integrity(bio))
+ req->nr_integrity_segments += blk_rq_count_integrity_sg(req->q,
+ bio);
return 1;
no_merge:
@@ -731,6 +734,7 @@ static int ll_merge_requests_fn(struct request_queue *q, struct request *req,
/* Merge is OK... */
req->nr_phys_segments = total_phys_segments;
+ req->nr_integrity_segments += next->nr_integrity_segments;
return 1;
}
--
2.43.5
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-11 20:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-11 20:12 [PATCHv4 00/10] block integrity merging and counting Keith Busch
2024-09-11 20:12 ` [PATCHv4 01/10] blk-mq: unconditional nr_integrity_segments Keith Busch
2024-09-12 7:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-09-13 1:47 ` Martin K. Petersen
2024-09-11 20:12 ` [PATCHv4 02/10] blk-mq: set the nr_integrity_segments from bio Keith Busch
2024-09-13 1:47 ` Martin K. Petersen
2024-09-11 20:12 ` Keith Busch [this message]
2024-09-13 1:48 ` [PATCHv4 03/10] blk-integrity: properly account for segments Martin K. Petersen
2024-09-11 20:12 ` [PATCHv4 04/10] blk-integrity: consider entire bio list for merging Keith Busch
2024-09-12 7:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-09-11 20:12 ` [PATCHv4 05/10] block: provide a request helper for user integrity segments Keith Busch
2024-09-12 7:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-09-13 1:50 ` Martin K. Petersen
2024-09-13 12:33 ` Kanchan Joshi
2024-09-11 20:12 ` [PATCHv4 06/10] block: provide helper for nr_integrity_segments Keith Busch
2024-09-12 7:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-09-13 1:52 ` Martin K. Petersen
2024-09-13 12:35 ` Kanchan Joshi
2024-09-11 20:12 ` [PATCHv4 07/10] scsi: use request helper to get integrity segments Keith Busch
2024-09-13 1:53 ` Martin K. Petersen
2024-09-13 12:35 ` Kanchan Joshi
2024-09-11 20:12 ` [PATCHv4 08/10] nvme-rdma: " Keith Busch
2024-09-13 1:54 ` Martin K. Petersen
2024-09-13 12:37 ` Kanchan Joshi
2024-09-11 20:12 ` [PATCHv4 09/10] block: unexport blk_rq_count_integrity_sg Keith Busch
2024-09-13 1:54 ` Martin K. Petersen
2024-09-11 20:12 ` [PATCHv4 10/10] blk-integrity: improved sg segment mapping Keith Busch
2024-09-11 23:23 ` Keith Busch
2024-09-12 7:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-09-12 7:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-09-13 2:00 ` Martin K. Petersen
2024-09-13 3:45 ` 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=20240911201240.3982856-4-kbusch@meta.com \
--to=kbusch@meta.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).