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
next prev parent 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).