linux-block.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Increase BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS_CAP
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2025 10:40:55 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8c2943a8-ffaa-43b7-a28f-f6da4403208c@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aFGBJwK-doBF6fBz@fedora>

On 6/17/25 23:52, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 03:34:30PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> Back in 2015, commit d2be537c3ba3 ("block: bump BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS to
>> 2560") increased the default maximum size of a block device I/O to 2560
>> sectors (1280 KiB) to "accommodate a 10-data-disk stripe write with
>> chunk size 128k". This choice is rather arbitrary and since then,
>> improvements to the block layer have software RAID drivers correctly
>> advertize their stripe width through chunk_sectors and abuses of
>> BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS_CAP by drivers (to set the HW limit rather than the
>> default user controlled maximum I/O size) have been fixed.
>>
>> Since many block devices can benefit from a larger value of
>> BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS_CAP, and in particular HDDs, increase this value to
>> be 4MiB, or 8192 sectors.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Martin K . Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
>> ---
>>  include/linux/blkdev.h | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
>> index 85aab8bc96e7..7c35b2462048 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
>> @@ -1238,7 +1238,7 @@ enum blk_default_limits {
>>   * Not to be confused with the max_hw_sector limit that is entirely
>>   * controlled by the driver, usually based on hardware limits.
>>   */
>> -#define BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS_CAP	2560u
>> +#define BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS_CAP	8192u
> 
> The change itself looks good, but the definition should belong to block
> layer internal, so why not move it into internal header?

Good point. Now that no driver uses this macro directly, we can do that. I will
send a V2.

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research

  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-18  1:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-17  6:34 [PATCH] block: Increase BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS_CAP Damien Le Moal
2025-06-17 14:52 ` Ming Lei
2025-06-18  1:40   ` Damien Le Moal [this message]
2025-06-18  1:37 ` Martin K. Petersen
2025-06-18  4:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-18  5:11   ` Damien Le Moal

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=8c2943a8-ffaa-43b7-a28f-f6da4403208c@kernel.org \
    --to=dlemoal@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=ming.lei@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 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).