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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88B85C4332F for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 19:42:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229627AbiKUTms (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2022 14:42:48 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35244 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229501AbiKUTmr (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2022 14:42:47 -0500 Received: from mga18.intel.com (mga18.intel.com [134.134.136.126]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2673FD116; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 11:42:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1669059767; x=1700595767; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hWmAqluuQ5/3puqN3B6aykKHCk3Z+rkcmnnsHtMfROk=; b=GXh6CtHT8xbLYvhFkj7CLYbd1UsdAY8igpNiazeCowXsnsyXTQwxzFrf tqBVJUq6NmdHnz+mCMk04xL/X0xyziXoifr+0lhGJQ45zaCD6tKK+hIH+ z6EyjsxzTNJIRodojbOS2JL+WS8i46kfmwlKMfKWbgmSmC9yb82Cb01oL e+ymKjFQB1Ob6CvUkSnJ20IzVTdsKPgXR5h/mFkf7r0sR5sLQypq0Zjj9 hLvC9KlYIyiKQrglWwyXCeedVLlpY2L9yu4Ki7jllgM/q7apJaCO0BFZr iJCqSTBrNPmEAiQIclXillKSDyx78iNVJWMHek4ZWW6WV2Ay/xOHVo/tA A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10538"; a="297004546" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,182,1665471600"; d="scan'208";a="297004546" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by orsmga106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Nov 2022 11:42:46 -0800 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10538"; a="672211423" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,182,1665471600"; d="scan'208";a="672211423" Received: from ahunter6-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.0.2.15]) ([10.252.35.94]) by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Nov 2022 11:42:43 -0800 Message-ID: <1c9b3db6-3443-5580-08f2-42520d6a3318@intel.com> Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 21:42:39 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/102.0 Thunderbird/102.5.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] mmc: Improve block layer requeueing behavior Content-Language: en-US To: Bart Van Assche , =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_L=c3=b6hle?= , "axboe@kernel.dk" , "ulf.hansson@linaro.org" , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , Christoph Hellwig Cc: Avri Altman , "vincent.whitchurch@axis.com" References: <5df2c4d5-f426-e3ea-8e6d-f772ec7091b6@intel.com> From: Adrian Hunter Organization: Intel Finland Oy, Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki, Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4, Domiciled in Helsinki In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org On 21/11/22 21:14, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 11/21/22 00:25, Adrian Hunter wrote: >> On 18/11/22 19:27, Bart Van Assche wrote: >>> On 11/18/22 02:47, Adrian Hunter wrote: >>>> Does anyone know why the block layer does not support >>>> (max_hw_sectors << 9) < PAGE_SIZE ? >>> >>> Does this mean that the following patch series would not only be >>> useful for UFS but also for MMC? "[PATCH 00/10] Support DMA segments >>> smaller than the page size" >>> (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/20221019222324.362705-1-bvanassche@acm.org/). >> >> That patchset still does not allow max_hw_sectors = 1 which is >> what Christian's case needs. > > Hi Adrian, > > Why would that patch series not support max_hw_sectors = 1? What am I overlooking? blk_queue_max_hw_sectors() does not allow it.