Linux RAID subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nilay Shroff <nilay@linux.ibm.com>
To: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>,
	agk@redhat.com, snitzer@kernel.org, mpatocka@redhat.com,
	song@kernel.org, yukuai3@huawei.com, hch@lst.de, axboe@kernel.dk
Cc: dm-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	ojaswin@linux.ibm.com, martin.petersen@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] block: use chunk_sectors when evaluating stacked atomic write limits
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 20:03:50 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ef5aceb9-a5ec-489c-88e3-f674d59299ad@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250618083737.4084373-6-john.g.garry@oracle.com>



On 6/18/25 2:07 PM, John Garry wrote:
> The atomic write unit max value is limited by any stacked device stripe
> size.
> 
> It is required that the atomic write unit is a power-of-2 factor of the
> stripe size.
> 
> Currently we use io_min limit to hold the stripe size, and check for a
> io_min <= SECTOR_SIZE when deciding if we have a striped stacked device.
> 
> Nilay reports that this causes a problem when the physical block size is
> greater than SECTOR_SIZE [0].
> 
> Furthermore, io_min may be mutated when stacking devices, and this makes
> it a poor candidate to hold the stripe size. Such an example (of when
> io_min may change) would be when the io_min is less than the physical
> block size.
> 
> Use chunk_sectors to hold the stripe size, which is more appropriate.
> 
> [0] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/888f3b1d-7817-4007-b3b3-1a2ea04df771@linux.ibm.com/T/#mecca17129f72811137d3c2f1e477634e77f06781
> 
> Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>

Looks good to me:
Reviewed-by: Nilay Shroff <nilay@linux.ibm.com>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-06-20 14:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-18  8:37 [PATCH v2 0/5] block/md/dm: set chunk_sectors from stacked dev stripe size John Garry
2025-06-18  8:37 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] block: sanitize chunk_sectors for atomic write limits John Garry
2025-06-20 14:30   ` Nilay Shroff
2025-06-18  8:37 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] md/raid0: set chunk_sectors limit John Garry
2025-06-20 14:31   ` Nilay Shroff
2025-07-02  9:33   ` Yu Kuai
2025-06-18  8:37 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] md/raid10: " John Garry
2025-06-20 14:32   ` Nilay Shroff
2025-07-02  9:33   ` Yu Kuai
2025-06-18  8:37 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] dm-stripe: limit chunk_sectors to the stripe size John Garry
2025-06-20 14:33   ` Nilay Shroff
2025-06-23  9:49   ` Mikulas Patocka
2025-06-18  8:37 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] block: use chunk_sectors when evaluating stacked atomic write limits John Garry
2025-06-20  2:40   ` Martin K. Petersen
2025-06-20 11:35     ` John Garry
2025-06-20 14:33   ` Nilay Shroff [this message]
2025-06-20 14:29 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] block/md/dm: set chunk_sectors from stacked dev stripe size Nilay Shroff
2025-06-26  9:36 ` John Garry
2025-07-02  8:28   ` John Garry

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=ef5aceb9-a5ec-489c-88e3-f674d59299ad@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=nilay@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=agk@redhat.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=dm-devel@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=john.g.garry@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=mpatocka@redhat.com \
    --cc=ojaswin@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=snitzer@kernel.org \
    --cc=song@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