From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6187DC31E57 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 09:10:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22F4A2080C for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 09:10:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=broadcom.com header.i=@broadcom.com header.b="ZVXe7pF/" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727669AbfFQJK2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jun 2019 05:10:28 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-f50.google.com ([209.85.166.50]:36589 "EHLO mail-io1-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726887AbfFQJK2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jun 2019 05:10:28 -0400 Received: by mail-io1-f50.google.com with SMTP id h6so19623778ioh.3 for ; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 02:10:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadcom.com; s=google; h=from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:thread-index:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Mj+s4plNnZbEVe10BIzmZ1IijmMEuCHawFgLwkcZqoI=; b=ZVXe7pF/DKKbAtg0BLq1kHz+Yf8AmgubdjAQekKwZeBkWQQeo+lrwMdIAePBmlOgcE WJ3paACJ9GsoxC9mAywQ6EfBHW7Qhb1RZpLg6OjDRo0//12nX9SRpN+HRZNsKHbLnYNY mXR2sr52mBeN/pkOHc0Q5eeZBCOpWx8hMerKU= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :thread-index:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Mj+s4plNnZbEVe10BIzmZ1IijmMEuCHawFgLwkcZqoI=; b=fiO0KXaQbjFWSaLZ87WQqau9zq/K/tzccn0W22cmKnwbKA+75CM4crOCnJBCdIAWcP eqJ2YDHDgm4fVdfBHXZnkfZ9rqaV4uJaLwHx+Ntw539zy1Z63P/j3FKtizXlQVxHqHiM k3O6z001diq/GgrGkbyWnG2rDrah19Oumtr1dLSunMEZ2obJVVx5qet6aNLA7LlT3tIN +85+KLZ1izRJPYVJppFpwaIf1paPkrNHJZv8wjaANLhQrLL2u8EYvPSxVM9e55O9sL+y pd27UG57vRMP9Mt1GfCXzCtrF1toBuZcuXR3/Ip04mUDKCCnRM8cnU5M+FCnVVsOkB8W Uhgw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV1TNMwxDO8glMIZT3eESrJ77D2PO8M/wv3ufbF5PlmyVTbRTNJ iXErd03LbhXzJJEnRI5h9hEUV3Xz5FuFA+L8bG8U2A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwKR2USXudxvvKfOK55glU2D5y5FMiBAo7oI/W/qo2pfnh4b2Kx5on0RhBtIfzYHBRJ2BHKN9CUkaC5PBmqWrM= X-Received: by 2002:a02:298b:: with SMTP id p133mr87239176jap.37.1560762627424; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 02:10:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Kashyap Desai References: <20190605190836.32354-1-hch@lst.de> <20190605190836.32354-11-hch@lst.de> <20190608081400.GA19573@lst.de> <98f6557ae91a7cdfe8069fcf7d788c88@mail.gmail.com> <20190617084433.GA7969@lst.de> In-Reply-To: <20190617084433.GA7969@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: AQNLjZIO2zMn7N+9xPobnDbFSu4o5gI2RJdJAgF+bYgBfxw4kQGu5dmvAzKBgtajXfsrgA== Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 14:40:25 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: RE: [PATCH 10/13] megaraid_sas: set virt_boundary_mask in the scsi host To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Jens Axboe , Sebastian Ott , Sagi Grimberg , Max Gurtovoy , Bart Van Assche , Ulf Hansson , Alan Stern , Oliver Neukum , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, "PDL,MEGARAIDLINUX" , PDL-MPT-FUSIONLINUX , linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, usb-storage@lists.one-eyed-alien.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 01:28:47AM +0530, Kashyap Desai wrote: > > Is there any changes in API blk_queue_virt_boundary? I could not find > > relevant code which account for this. Can you help ? > > Which git repo shall I use for testing ? That way I can confirm, I > > didn't miss relevant changes. > > Latest mainline plus the series (which is about to get resent). > blk_queue_virt_boundary now forced an unlimited max_hw_sectors as that is > how PRP-like schemes work, to work around a block driver merging bug. But > we also need to communicate that limit to the DMA layer so that we don't set > a smaller iommu segment size limitation. > > > >From your above explanation, it means (after this patch) max segment > > >size > > of the MR controller will be set to 4K. > > Earlier it is possible to receive single SGE of 64K datalength (Since > > max seg size was 64K), but now the same buffer will reach the driver > > having 16 SGEs (Each SGE will contain 4K length). > > No, there is no more limit for the size of the segment at all, as for PRPs each > PRP is sort of a segment from the hardware perspective. > We just require the segments to not have gaps, as PRPs don't allow for that. Thanks for clarification. I have also observed that max_segment_size Is unchanged and it is 64K. > > That being said I think these patches are wrong for the case of megaraid or > mpt having both NVMe and SAS/ATA devices behind a single controller. > Is that a valid configuration? Yes. This is a valid configuration.