From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Yi Zhang <yi.zhang@redhat.com>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] block: make segment size limit workable for > 4K PAGE_SIZE
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 21:26:09 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z6n-cbpvEerzNlAr@fedora> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51da6bf9-4226-467d-87c1-e6ec785b1c06@suse.de>
On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 01:14:00PM +0100, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 2/10/25 10:03, Ming Lei wrote:
> > PAGE_SIZE is applied in some block device queue limits, this way is
> > very fragile and is wrong:
> >
> > - queue limits are read from hardware, which is often one readonly
> > hardware property
> >
> > - PAGE_SIZE is one config option which can be changed during build time.
> >
> > In RH lab, it has been found that max segment size of some mmc card is
> > less than 64K, then this kind of card can't work in case of 64K PAGE_SIZE.
> >
> So why isn't this reflected in the blk_min_segment settings?
> Or, rather, why isn't setting blk_min_segment not enough?
There isn't min_segment_size setting, at block layer takes PAGE_SIZE
as the actual min_segment_size.
>
> > Fix this issue by using BLK_MIN_SEGMENT_SIZE in related code for dealing
> > with queue limits and checking if bio needn't split. Define BLK_MIN_SEGMENT_SIZE
> > as 4K(minimized PAGE_SIZE).
> >
> But why 4k then? That is a value like anything else, and what is the
> rationale to use that instead of the more natural sector size?
The comment explains it already: 4K = min(PAGE_SIZE).
Thanks,
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-10 13:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-10 9:03 [PATCH V2] block: make segment size limit workable for > 4K PAGE_SIZE Ming Lei
2025-02-10 12:14 ` Hannes Reinecke
2025-02-10 13:26 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2025-02-10 20:17 ` Luis Chamberlain
2025-02-11 2:10 ` Ming Lei
2025-02-13 7:34 ` Daniel Gomez
2025-02-13 8:02 ` Ming Lei
2025-02-13 8:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-13 8:51 ` Ming Lei
2025-02-13 14:18 ` Daniel Gomez
2025-02-14 1:37 ` Ming Lei
2025-02-13 8:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-02-13 8:45 ` John Garry
2025-02-13 9:58 ` Ming Lei
2025-02-13 10:23 ` John Garry
2025-02-13 10:35 ` Ming Lei
2025-02-13 11:12 ` John Garry
2025-02-13 11:33 ` Ming Lei
2025-02-13 11:41 ` John Garry
2025-02-14 9:38 ` Daniel Gomez
2025-02-14 11:19 ` Ming Lei
2025-02-14 12:28 ` Daniel Gomez
2025-02-14 12:51 ` Ming Lei
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=Z6n-cbpvEerzNlAr@fedora \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=john.g.garry@oracle.com \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=yi.zhang@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