From: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
To: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
Cc: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
Alasdair Kergon <agk@redhat.com>, DMML <dm-devel@lists.linux.dev>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] dm-ebs: Mark full buffer dirty even on partial write
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2025 13:40:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aRxpPFQmbB0wnmM7@milan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <73556fc8-5fbf-37cb-26b9-7cdb88f69720@redhat.com>
On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 01:00:36PM +0100, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2025, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
>
> > Hello, Mikulas!
> >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > What is the logical_block_size of the underlying nvme device? - i.e.
> > > what's the content of this file
> > > /sys/block/nvme0n1/queue/logical_block_size in the virtual machine?
> > >
> > It is 512. Whereas a physical is bigger, i.e. my device can not perform
> > I/O by 512 granularity.
>
> And what is physical block size? Is it 8192?
>
Bigger then logical.
> > As for virtual machine, i just simulated the problem so people can set
> > it up and check. The commit message describes how it can be reproduced.
> >
> > The dm-ebs target which i setup does ebs to ubs conversion, so the NVME
> > driver gets BIOs are in size and aligned to ubs size. The ubs size
> > corresponds to the underlying physical device I/O size.
> >
> > So your patch does not work if logical < physical. Therefore it does
> > not help my project.
>
> Logical block size is the granularity at which the device can accept I/O.
> Physical block size is the block size on the medium.
>
> If logical < physical, then the device performs read-modify-write cycle
> when writing blocks that are not aligned at physical block size.
>
This is not true. It depends on your device and specification. If it
can't there is the dm-ebs that does the job.
> So, your setup is broken, because it advertises logical block size 512,
> but it is not able to perform I/O at this granularity.
>
I posted the workflow how to reproduce the problem. See the commit
messages. But as i noted it is for people so they can simulate it.
But in my case, real one, logical < pysical.
> There is this piece of code in include/linux/blkdev.h:
> #ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> /*
> * We should strive for 1 << (PAGE_SHIFT + MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER)
> * however we constrain this to what we can validate and test.
> */
> #define BLK_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE SZ_64K
:wq
> #else
> #define BLK_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE PAGE_SIZE
> #endif
>
> /* blk_validate_limits() validates bsize, so drivers don't usually need to */
> static inline int blk_validate_block_size(unsigned long bsize)
> {
> if (bsize < 512 || bsize > BLK_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE || !is_power_of_2(bsize))
> return -EINVAL;
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> What happens when you define CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE in your .config?
> Does it fix the problem with small logical block size for you?
>
TRANSPARENT stuff allows you to work with PS < BS. I have it enabled in
my case.
Just to repeat, the device can not do I/O with logical bs only physical.
--
Uladzislau Rezki
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-18 12:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-17 10:59 [RESEND PATCH] dm-ebs: Mark full buffer dirty even on partial write Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2025-11-17 20:48 ` Mikulas Patocka
2025-11-18 11:39 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-18 12:00 ` Mikulas Patocka
2025-11-18 12:40 ` Uladzislau Rezki [this message]
2025-11-18 12:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-18 14:15 ` Benjamin Marzinski
2025-11-18 17:21 ` Mikulas Patocka
2025-11-19 5:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-19 8:43 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-19 8:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-19 8:57 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-19 9:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-19 9:01 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-19 9:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-19 9:13 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-19 9:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-19 17:26 ` Mikulas Patocka
2025-11-20 6:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-20 12:08 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-20 12:40 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-21 7:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-21 7:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-21 13:21 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-21 16:48 ` Benjamin Marzinski
2025-11-24 10:43 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-24 14:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-24 15:30 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2025-11-24 17:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-11-24 18:05 ` Uladzislau Rezki
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-10-14 14:47 Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)
2025-10-16 19:59 ` Andrew Morton
2025-10-17 15:55 ` Uladzislau Rezki
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=aRxpPFQmbB0wnmM7@milan \
--to=urezki@gmail.com \
--cc=agk@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dm-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpatocka@redhat.com \
--cc=snitzer@redhat.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