From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.ozlabs.org (gandalf.ozlabs.org [150.107.74.76]) (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 7E7A8745F4; Fri, 31 May 2024 08:06:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=150.107.74.76 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717142794; cv=none; b=ENwcTK9QBAjziuRzLYVEZLFGhPib5rRWrzpO6dGB0yNk17nTC5Vy1B+hNx3/cKvYFi+LEV+5rMKtWN2LpPt6fhCdbz0GHneaT0P1GXAmZdTmLNTSOrxdIMFT+BbTqx6y7MpaJE9+E1e1mhRCPhtyxDXPPafqbEK5jS1oWXyE4jQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717142794; c=relaxed/simple; bh=VPUioJ9IncgAwqbCt6ppxEi5MBR+Hh4+6TY5inBUiPA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=fCOyrglM3Y7r8r9rPapAunm12ukWDMWNeDgUbyT/ys0Y4LuQ+a8NnWGGeK2VSvIwCyyB7V1wtnmgQWwSkihfw/1eZXEvUGmga0y9EGgjJZwnVXbjqZZA+WP1yVkOC3a1QU3lxndpM5FD1GUZXvqSPT9GbKxJt5FpxKUtAgXDXrM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ellerman.id.au; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ellerman.id.au; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ellerman.id.au header.i=@ellerman.id.au header.b=D4JcyVTt; arc=none smtp.client-ip=150.107.74.76 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ellerman.id.au Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ellerman.id.au Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ellerman.id.au header.i=@ellerman.id.au header.b="D4JcyVTt" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ellerman.id.au; s=201909; t=1717142790; bh=FYUiRJCdcnCVjMOkEnGgfbId1LsBcdzYwyyPQhPx3DE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=D4JcyVTtiYxOq8Zi6clWE/K+RQvgcOoOcksTd+TGoBTn6QqgfD0G3Y+8vnqGe53w5 ihbPLxd2u8e1mibwi3NIqIbhPqqH+5s43bD7wz3LReLwcgZxdGl/JUlV44vrqwc9us tadf7bLnJyxZusxHqjaS9V5h87dZB0ysq5dThakJ0dbh6+HVn2fQJg6etSDzwhlT19 kbdE60JlKyhWoSRR/ebuxz6/JcIrH8Tt2llmKTeQg6LjxV1ssegJgz5/OMkPDFIms/ haKV7w1yx+taUZDjOve+jaQn7guhicMOMaffYrEgPZNWXL1+dS/z3ykXnLWmpJfKSY B3Qa5khAO1AvQ== Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4VrG0h2Df2z4wqM; Fri, 31 May 2024 18:06:28 +1000 (AEST) From: Michael Ellerman To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)" , John Garry , Jens Axboe , "Martin K. Petersen" , Damien Le Moal , Niklas Cassel , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Guenter Roeck , Christoph Hellwig , Linux kernel regressions list Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/23] scsi: initialize scsi midlayer limits before allocating the queue In-Reply-To: <20240531060827.GA17723@lst.de> References: <20240520151536.GA32532@lst.de> <8734pz4gdh.fsf@mail.lhotse> <87wmnb2x2y.fsf@mail.lhotse> <20240531060827.GA17723@lst.de> Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 18:06:25 +1000 Message-ID: <87sexy2yny.fsf@mail.lhotse> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Christoph Hellwig writes: > On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 12:28:21AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: >> No that's wrong. The actual hardware page size is 4K, but >> CONFIG_PAGE_SIZE and PAGE_SHIFT etc. is 64K. >> >> So at least for this user the driver used to work with 64K pages, and >> now doesn't. > > Which suggested that the communicated max_hw_sectors is wrong, and > previously we were saved by the block layer increasing it to > PAGE_SIZE after a warning. Should we just increment it to 64k? It looks like that user actually only has the CDROM hanging off pata_macio, so it's possible it has been broken previously and they didn't notice. I'll see if they can confirm the CDROM has been working up until now. I can test the CDROM on my G5 next week. cheers