From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08F821EE7B9 for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2025 09:30:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756114227; cv=none; b=YdixinC96MCtU2QBHTv3A4ySK1jKOmZTo2kFubLmqdm/8XgnKJ16M63A3/7IUEhKodz5DIdqovFoiNMiGktCuprXoTmxDkBGZ3Z6dUwldtt9QSQXWZPHp/JEpX1BkBB4mcubCVkhnkloTdrrx+7aHmTJkfWyGygmwD4B4+zVA7c= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756114227; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OU7VDv3Ik5OquhYHOS8hDGWMbyIjdDAMocFMVEM+aeg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=hBahk2zHRTTt5oQCcBgmX37EJ3q1mQX5HVQ+Z62Jb6NDenPJ7DE1LlbPntwKzKhBicSRdD8oAIx/vzDk/hsiIEFa1jPii2RvnG3KK9ZcaRX921EURn4UUze4eYVWPiktUUrAYQetm8F8eeUkWbHRLwLblwZbR90fc3eXrmzsyCI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=YjPK4Vwt; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="YjPK4Vwt" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=tIy6NvyzpEVL57IiRP/CxCN/mr82a9jUaywBE6NxTH0=; b=YjPK4VwtPEQGIYTEjehOYplBl3 5lPKqdrvu5xD2BrGXHfbv10YVTlrOYO4yPVkDz3NArcjdq3AsIbcwDVYHla4tnm4L2maSUOjllbe+ PvyaiA6JpvEwooAs0jPYqW4ekBFO9L9QfEcHYr3KoaDgkGztlS/99u4CCqyBDIHW/4+TfOxXZvJg1 xrT1m0FoKq2c04cheQ2Z4U8IHnBMXs2WeFxEpUlJ3Ctxx2MR6EzA43pxvF2ILdJnUdPhumVbJcg+o 81tk2XP1F9hY7dk1B64aQY+BS3DZbhTQhxGhukPX0oPO74yLTYW32MzIW/sppOU+bKgaSSOW4S/3x MnIaTyFg==; Received: from hch by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1uqTWz-00000007VXi-1Z87; Mon, 25 Aug 2025 09:30:25 +0000 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2025 02:30:25 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Keith Busch Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, ming.lei@redhat.com, Keith Busch Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: rename min_segment_size Message-ID: References: <20250822171038.1847867-1-kbusch@meta.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250822171038.1847867-1-kbusch@meta.com> X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 10:10:38AM -0700, Keith Busch wrote: > From: Keith Busch > > Despite its name, the block layer is fine with segments smaller that the > "min_segment_size" limit. The value is an optimization limit indicating > the largest aligned segment that can be used without considering segment > boundary limits, so give it a name that reflects that. But max_aligned_segment also feels wrong for that. It's not really the maximum alignmnet, it is the fast path alignment. Maybe something like fast_segment_granularity or nosplit_segment_granularity?