From: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>,
colyli@kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: ignore underlying non-stack devices io_opt
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2025 16:10:32 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aa12bb2b-0767-a30d-f7a6-a13722711828@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aKLdm4GPVfXOm0vO@infradead.org>
Hi,
在 2025/08/18 16:00, Christoph Hellwig 写道:
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 02:31:20PM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> 在 2025/08/18 14:18, Christoph Hellwig 写道:
>>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 02:14:06PM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote:
>>>> Please take a look at the first patch, nothing special, the new flag
>>>> will be passed to the top device.
>>>
>>> But passing it on will be incorrect in many cases, e.g. for any
>>> write caching solution. And that is a much more common use case
>>> than stacking different raid level using block layer stacking.
>>
>> I don't quite understand why it's incorrect for write caching solution,
>> can you please explain in details? AFAIK, the behaviour is only changed
>> for the first mdraid device is the stacking chain.
>
> The way I read the patch, the flag is inherited if any underlying
> device sets it.
>
> Now if you stack something that buffers most I/O the md raid limits
> aren't really that relevant, and you'd rather expose the limits
> for the writeback or read caching.
Why? We just set the flag for mdraid disks first, and then inherit to
top devices that is stacked by mdraid, so md raid limits should always
be relevant. I still don't understand the problem that you said :(
Thanks,
Kuai
>
>
> .
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-18 8:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-17 15:26 [PATCH 1/2] block: ignore underlying non-stack devices io_opt colyli
2025-08-17 15:26 ` [PATCH 2/2] md: split bio by io_opt size in md_submit_bio() colyli
2025-08-18 1:38 ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-18 8:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-18 9:51 ` John Garry
[not found] ` <6DA25F37-26B3-4912-90A3-346CFD9A6EEA@coly.li>
2025-08-18 12:20 ` John Garry
2025-08-17 18:37 ` [PATCH 1/2] block: ignore underlying non-stack devices io_opt Paul Menzel
2025-08-18 1:14 ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-18 2:51 ` Damien Le Moal
2025-08-18 2:57 ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-18 3:18 ` Damien Le Moal
2025-08-18 3:40 ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-18 5:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-18 6:14 ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-18 6:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-18 6:31 ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-18 8:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-18 8:10 ` Yu Kuai [this message]
2025-08-18 8:14 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-18 8:57 ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-18 9:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=aa12bb2b-0767-a30d-f7a6-a13722711828@huaweicloud.com \
--to=yukuai1@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=colyli@kernel.org \
--cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yukuai3@huawei.com \
/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).