linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Cc: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>, Keith Busch <kbusch@fb.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	axboe@kernel.dk, Kernel Team <Kernel-team@fb.com>,
	hch@lst.de, bvanassche@acm.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 3/3] block: relax direct io memory alignment
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 12:41:49 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e4b57864-a685-d7a4-b8dd-1078547f7b0b@opensource.wdc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YoZ8OKDXZBiNd9XB@sol.localdomain>

On 5/20/22 02:19, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 08:45:55AM +0200, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> On 2022/05/19 6:56, Keith Busch wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 08:27:31PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So the bio ends up with a total length that is a multiple of the logical block
>>>> size, but the lengths of the individual bvecs in the bio are *not* necessarily
>>>> multiples of the logical block size.  That's the problem.
>>>
>>> I'm surely missing something here. I know the bvecs are not necessarily lbs
>>> aligned, but why does that matter? Is there some driver that can only take
>>> exactly 1 bvec, but allows it to be unaligned? If so, we could take the segment
>>> queue limit into account, but I am not sure that we need to.
>>
>> For direct IO, the first bvec will always be aligned to a logical block size.
>> See __blkdev_direct_IO() and __blkdev_direct_IO_simple():
>>
>>         if ((pos | iov_iter_alignment(iter)) &
>>             (bdev_logical_block_size(bdev) - 1))
>>                 return -EINVAL;
>>
>> And given that, all bvecs should also be LBA aligned since the LBA size is
>> always a divisor of the page size. Since splitting is always done on an LBA
>> boundary, I do not see how we can ever get bvecs that are not LBA aligned.
>> Or I am missing something too...
>>
> 
> You're looking at the current upstream code.  This patch changes that to:
> 
> 	if ((pos | iov_iter_count(iter)) & (bdev_logical_block_size(bdev) - 1))
> 		return -EINVAL;
> 	if (iov_iter_alignment(iter) & bdev_dma_alignment(bdev))
> 		return -EINVAL;
> 
> So, if this patch is accepted, then the file position and total I/O length will
> need to be logical block aligned (as before), but the memory address and length
> of each individual iovec will no longer need to be logical block aligned.  How
> the iovecs get turned into bios (and thus bvecs) is a little complicated, but
> the result is that logical blocks will be able to span bvecs.

Indeed. I missed that change in patch 3. Got it.

> 
> - Eric


-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research

  reply	other threads:[~2022-05-20  3:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-18 17:11 [PATCHv2 0/3] direct io alignment relax Keith Busch
2022-05-18 17:11 ` [PATCHv2 1/3] block/bio: remove duplicate append pages code Keith Busch
2022-05-18 20:21   ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2022-05-19  4:28   ` Bart Van Assche
2022-05-19  7:32   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-19 14:19     ` Keith Busch
2022-05-18 17:11 ` [PATCHv2 2/3] block: export dma_alignment attribute Keith Busch
2022-05-18 20:22   ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2022-05-19  4:30   ` Bart Van Assche
2022-05-19  7:33   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-18 17:11 ` [PATCHv2 3/3] block: relax direct io memory alignment Keith Busch
2022-05-19  0:14   ` Eric Biggers
2022-05-19  1:00     ` Keith Busch
2022-05-19  1:53       ` Eric Biggers
2022-05-19  1:59         ` Keith Busch
2022-05-19  2:08           ` Eric Biggers
2022-05-19  2:25             ` Keith Busch
2022-05-19  3:27               ` Eric Biggers
2022-05-19  4:40                 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-05-19  4:56                 ` Keith Busch
2022-05-19  6:45                   ` Damien Le Moal
2022-05-19 17:19                     ` Eric Biggers
2022-05-20  3:41                       ` Damien Le Moal [this message]
2022-05-19  7:41                   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-19 16:35                     ` Keith Busch
2022-05-20  6:07                       ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-19 17:01                   ` Keith Busch
2022-05-19 17:27                     ` Eric Biggers
2022-05-19 17:43                       ` Keith Busch
2022-05-19  7:39       ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-19 22:31         ` Keith Busch
2022-05-19  7:38   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-19 14:08     ` Keith Busch
2022-05-20  6:10       ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-18 22:45 ` [PATCHv2 0/3] direct io alignment relax Jens Axboe
2022-05-19  7:42   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-19 12:46     ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-18 23:26 ` Eric Biggers
2022-05-19  0:51   ` Keith Busch
2022-05-19  1:02     ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2022-05-19  2:02       ` Eric Biggers
2022-05-19  7:43         ` hch

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=e4b57864-a685-d7a4-b8dd-1078547f7b0b@opensource.wdc.com \
    --to=damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com \
    --cc=Kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=kbusch@fb.com \
    --cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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).