From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: block: remove artifical max_hw_sectors cap Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 15:31:50 +0100 Message-ID: <20150107143150.GC659@lst.de> References: <5497F319.20802@profihost.ag> <20141223082805.GA2303@lst.de> <1420583956.6927.61.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:59758 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751381AbbAGOby (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2015 09:31:54 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1420583956.6927.61.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, target-devel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 02:39:16PM -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > The fabric_max_sectors=8192 value is already being exposed by target in > block limits EVPD as MAXIMUM TRANSFER LENGTH. > > I'm guessing that since the host side support was not added until June > 2014 in commit bcdb247c by MKP, Stefan is likely using an earlier > initiator that is not honoring this value. If I understand Stefan correct he was using a recent 3.19-rc kernel, which contains my commit in the subject that stops capping the max_sectors used by the kernel below that which the hardware supports. Given that LIO actually implements the block limits EVPD that suggests we're not properly using that information. Stefant, what does: sg_vpd -p bl /dev/sdX for the LIO device tell?