linux-ide.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Mark Lord <liml@rtr.ca>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	IDE/ATA development list <linux-ide@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata-core More robust parsing for multi_count(v5)
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2009 11:31:16 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <49E20944.7070709@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090412161812.78e92948@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>

Alan Cox wrote:
>> The limit for sata_mv chipsets seems to actually be 7-sectors or less
>> for read/write multiple.  Which means a max of 4 in practice.
>>
>> Similarly, we should also be preventing *any* PIO of more than one DRQ
>> for sata_mv.  But I don't see a sensible way to do that either.
> 
> Ugghhh..

Our infrastructure just flat doesn't deal well with per-xfer-mode sector 
count limitations.  It is quite easy for us to limit per-xfer sector 
count on a __per device__ basis -- both SCSI and block layer handle that 
well.

But deviating from that implies potentially having to re-merge (or 
split) block layer requests -- IOW quickly moves into the non-trivial, 
cross-stack category of problem.

Problem is, of course, sector count limits in ATA can be per-command (or 
per-xfer-mode), not just per-device.

	Jeff




  reply	other threads:[~2009-04-12 15:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-03-18 14:26 [PATCH] libata-core Use more robust parsing for multi_count Mark Lord
2009-03-18 14:32 ` Alan Cox
2009-03-18 15:06   ` Mark Lord
2009-03-18 15:13     ` Mark Lord
2009-03-18 17:09     ` Alan Cox
2009-03-18 15:58 ` Mark Lord
2009-03-18 16:18   ` [PATCH] libata-core More robust parsing for multi_count(v3) Mark Lord
2009-03-18 16:24     ` Mark Lord
2009-03-19  0:23     ` Tejun Heo
2009-03-19  0:25       ` Tejun Heo
2009-03-19 17:30         ` [PATCH] libata-core More robust parsing for multi_count(v4) Mark Lord
2009-03-19 17:32           ` [PATCH] libata-core More robust parsing for multi_count(v5) Mark Lord
2009-03-19 23:33             ` Tejun Heo
2009-03-20  3:37               ` Mark Lord
2009-03-20 13:13               ` Mark Lord
2009-03-20 13:14                 ` Mark Lord
2009-03-20 14:07                   ` Alan Cox
2009-03-20 15:36                     ` Mark Lord
2009-03-20 23:14                       ` Tejun Heo
2009-03-21  0:54                         ` Jeff Garzik
2009-03-21  2:17                           ` Tejun Heo
2009-03-21 13:54                             ` Mark Lord
2009-03-21 14:02                           ` Alan Cox
2009-03-21 14:59                             ` Mark Lord
2009-03-20 13:38                 ` Alan Cox
2009-04-12 15:10                 ` Mark Lord
2009-04-12 15:18                   ` Alan Cox
2009-04-12 15:31                     ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2009-03-25  2:40             ` Jeff Garzik

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=49E20944.7070709@pobox.com \
    --to=jgarzik@pobox.com \
    --cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=liml@rtr.ca \
    --cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tj@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).