Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1383407 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-04-20 15:50 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-04-20 15:50 +0200 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH RFC] block: fix bio merge checks when virt_boundary is set Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com> - 2016-04-20 15:50 +0200
| From | Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-04-20 15:50 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC] block: fix bio merge checks when virt_boundary is set |
| Message-ID | <rq0FZ-fr-23@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:20:28PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: >>>> Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com> writes: >>>> > been combined. In any case, I think you can get what you're after just >>>> > by moving the gap check after BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGABLE. Does the following >>>> > look ok to you? >>>> > >>>> >>>> Thanks, it does. >>> >>> Cool, thanks for confirming. >>> >>>> Will you send it or would you like me to do that with your Suggested-by? >>> >>> I'm not confident yet this doesn't break anything, particularly since >>> we moved the gap check after the length check. Just wanted to confirm >>> the concept addressed your concern, but still need to take a closer look >>> and test before submitting. >> >> IMO, the change on blk_bio_segment_split() is correct, because actually it >> is a sg gap and the check should have been done between segments >> instead of bvecs. So it is reasonable to move the check just before populating >> a new segment. > > Thinking of the 1st part change further, looks it is just correct in concept, > but wrong from current implementation. Because of bios/reqs merge, > blk_rq_map_sg() may end one segment in any bvec in theroy, so I guess > that is why each non-1st bvec need the check to make sure no sg gap. > Looks a very crazy limit, :-) > >> >> But for the 2nd change in bio_will_gap(), which should fix Vitaly's problem, I >> am still not sure if it is completely correct. bio_will_gap() is used >> to check if two >> bios may be merged. Suppose two bios are continues physically, the last bvec >> in 1st bio and the first bvec in 2nd bio might not be in one same segment >> because of segment size limit. > > How about the attached patch? > I just wanted to revive the discussion as the issue persists. I re-tested your patch against 4.6-rc4 and it efficiently solves the issue. pre-patch: # time mkfs.ntfs /dev/sdb1 Cluster size has been automatically set to 4096 bytes. Initializing device with zeroes: 100% - Done. Creating NTFS volume structures. mkntfs completed successfully. Have a nice day. real8m10.977s user0m0.115s sys0m12.672s post-patch: # time mkfs.ntfs /dev/sdb1 Cluster size has been automatically set to 4096 bytes. Initializing device with zeroes: 100% - Done. Creating NTFS volume structures. mkntfs completed successfully. Have a nice day. real0m42.430s user0m0.171s sys0m7.675s Will you send this patch? Please let me know if I can further assist. Thanks! -- Vitaly
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web