From: Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg@linbit.com>
To: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>, Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com>,
device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>,
jens.axboe@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dm: max_segments=1 if merge_bvec_fn is not supported
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 14:14:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100308131449.GA15156@racke> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1003080321190.25635@hs20-bc2-1.build.redhat.com>
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 03:35:37AM -0500, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> Hi
>
> That patch with limits->max_segments = 1; is wrong. It fixes this bug
> sometimes and sometimes not.
>
> The problem is, if someone attempts to create a bio with two vector
> entries, the first maps the last sector contained in some page and the
> second maps the first sector of the next physical page: it has one
> segment, it has size <= PAGE_SIZE, but it still may cross raid stripe and
> the raid driver will reject it.
Now that you put it that way ;)
You are right.
My asumption that "single segment" was
equalvalent in practice with "single bvec"
does not hold true in that case.
Then, what about adding seg_boundary_mask restrictions as well?
max_sectors = PAGE_SIZE >> 9;
max_segments = 1;
seg_boundary_mask = PAGE_SIZE -1;
or some such.
> > > This is not the first time this has been patched, btw.
> > > See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=440093
> > > and the patch by Mikulas:
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=342638&action=diff
>
> Look at this patch, it is the proper way how to fix it: create a
> merge_bvec_fn that reject more than one biovec entry.
If adding seg_boundary_mask is still not sufficient,
lets merge that patch instead?
Why has it been dropped, respectively never been merged?
It became obsolete for dm-linear by 7bc3447b,
but in general the bug is still there, or am I missing something?
Lars
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-08 13:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-06 21:10 [PATCH] dm: max_segments=1 if merge_bvec_fn is not supported Lars Ellenberg
2010-03-08 5:33 ` Neil Brown
2010-03-08 8:35 ` Mikulas Patocka
2010-03-08 13:14 ` Lars Ellenberg [this message]
2010-03-18 18:48 ` Andrew Morton
2010-03-18 21:48 ` Neil Brown
2010-12-04 6:43 ` [PATCH] dm: check max_sectors in dm_merge_bvec (was: Re: dm: max_segments=1 if merge_bvec_fn is not supported) Mike Snitzer
2010-12-04 16:03 ` Lars Ellenberg
2010-12-04 19:21 ` Mike Snitzer
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=20100308131449.GA15156@racke \
--to=lars.ellenberg@linbit.com \
--cc=agk@redhat.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpatocka@redhat.com \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
/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