Linux-NVME Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, sagi@grimberg.me
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3] nvme: skip noiob for zoned devices
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 20:02:05 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200818180205.GA29087@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200818175054.GB3097355@dhcp-10-100-145-180.wdl.wdc.com>

On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 10:50:54AM -0700, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 07:25:04PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > -	if (iob)
> > > -		blk_queue_chunk_sectors(ns->queue, rounddown_pow_of_two(iob));
> > > +	if (iob) {
> > > +		if (!blk_queue_is_zoned(disk->queue))
> > > +			blk_queue_chunk_sectors(ns->queue, rounddown_pow_of_two(iob));
> > > +		else if (!(disk->flags & GENHD_FL_UP))
> > > +			pr_warn("%s: zone namespace has unused IO boundary:%u\n",
> > > +				disk->disk_name, iob);
> > 
> > This has some overly long line and looks fairly convoluted, what
> > about something like:
> > 
> > 	if (iob) {
> > 		unsigned int chunk_sectors = rounddown_pow_of_two(iob);
> 
> Unrelated to this particular patch, but ... why is this rounddown here?
> While we can't use chunk_sectors if it is not a power of two, but what
> benefit are we expecting to get from using the wrong boundary just
> because it's convenient to our block stack?

True, might make sense to add a validity check instead.

>  
> > 		if (blk_queue_is_zoned(disk->queue) &&
> > 		    chunk_sectors > blk_queue_zone_sectors(disk->queue))
> 
> I don't think we should skip iob just for the case where chunk_sectors
> is the larger value. A smaller value still ruins things like
> blk_queue_zone_sectors() and blk_queue_zone_no().
> 
> Also, we call blk_revalidate_disk_zones() after the iob check, so the
> blk_queue_zone_sectors() hasn't been initialized for this revalidate.
> 
> > 			pr_warn("%s: ignoring too large IO boundary: %u\n",
> > 				disk->disk_name, iob);
> 
> We don't want to emit a repeated warning on every disk revalidation, so
> I added the check for GENHD_FL_UP to warn only on the very first disk
> validation.

Ok.  Maybe we just need to move the whole thing into a helper to look
less confusing.

_______________________________________________
Linux-nvme mailing list
Linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme

  reply	other threads:[~2020-08-18 18:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-18 16:29 [PATCHv3] nvme: skip noiob for zoned devices Keith Busch
2020-08-18 17:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-18 17:50   ` Keith Busch
2020-08-18 18:02     ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2020-08-18 19:10       ` Sagi Grimberg
2020-08-18 19:20         ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-08-18 19:32           ` Sagi Grimberg

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=20200818180205.GA29087@lst.de \
    --to=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
    /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