Displaying 20 results from an estimated 30 matches for "blk_queue_max_hw_sector".
Did you mean:
blk_queue_max_hw_sectors
2018 Apr 05
5
[RFC PATCH 0/2] use larger max_request_size for virtio_blk
Hi,
For virtio block device, actually there is no a hard limit for max request
size, and virtio_blk driver set -1 to blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(q, -1U);.
But it doesn't work, because there is a default upper limitation
BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS (1280 sectors). So this series want to add a new helper
blk_queue_max_hw_sectors_no_limit to set a proper max reqeust size.
Weiping Zhang (2):
blk-setting: add new helper blk_queue_max_hw_sectors_...
2018 Apr 05
5
[RFC PATCH 0/2] use larger max_request_size for virtio_blk
Hi,
For virtio block device, actually there is no a hard limit for max request
size, and virtio_blk driver set -1 to blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(q, -1U);.
But it doesn't work, because there is a default upper limitation
BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS (1280 sectors). So this series want to add a new helper
blk_queue_max_hw_sectors_no_limit to set a proper max reqeust size.
Weiping Zhang (2):
blk-setting: add new helper blk_queue_max_hw_sectors_...
2018 Apr 05
0
[RFC PATCH 0/2] use larger max_request_size for virtio_blk
On 4/5/18 4:09 AM, Weiping Zhang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For virtio block device, actually there is no a hard limit for max request
> size, and virtio_blk driver set -1 to blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(q, -1U);.
> But it doesn't work, because there is a default upper limitation
> BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS (1280 sectors). So this series want to add a new helper
> blk_queue_max_hw_sectors_no_limit to set a proper max reqeust size.
>
> Weiping Zhang (2):
> blk-setting: add new he...
2017 Jan 09
3
[RFC PATCH] vring: Force use of DMA API for ARM-based systems
...0x9c/0x1a8
>>> ...
>>> [ 5.384449] [<ffff0000081829c4>] ondemand_readahead+0xfc/0x2b8
>>>
>>> Commit 9491ae4 caps the read-ahead request to a limit set by the backing
>>> device. For virtio-blk, it is infinite (as set by the call to
>>> blk_queue_max_hw_sectors in virtblk_probe).
>>>
>>> I'm not sure how to fix this. Setting an arbitrary sector limit in the
>>> virtio-blk driver seems unfair to other users. Maybe we should check if
>>> the device is behind a hardware IOMMU before using the DMA API?
>>
>>...
2017 Jan 09
3
[RFC PATCH] vring: Force use of DMA API for ARM-based systems
...0x9c/0x1a8
>>> ...
>>> [ 5.384449] [<ffff0000081829c4>] ondemand_readahead+0xfc/0x2b8
>>>
>>> Commit 9491ae4 caps the read-ahead request to a limit set by the backing
>>> device. For virtio-blk, it is infinite (as set by the call to
>>> blk_queue_max_hw_sectors in virtblk_probe).
>>>
>>> I'm not sure how to fix this. Setting an arbitrary sector limit in the
>>> virtio-blk driver seems unfair to other users. Maybe we should check if
>>> the device is behind a hardware IOMMU before using the DMA API?
>>
>>...
2017 Jan 06
2
[RFC PATCH] vring: Force use of DMA API for ARM-based systems
...] [<ffff00000856d99c>] __virtblk_add_req+0x9c/0x1a8
> ...
> [ 5.384449] [<ffff0000081829c4>] ondemand_readahead+0xfc/0x2b8
>
> Commit 9491ae4 caps the read-ahead request to a limit set by the backing
> device. For virtio-blk, it is infinite (as set by the call to
> blk_queue_max_hw_sectors in virtblk_probe).
>
> I'm not sure how to fix this. Setting an arbitrary sector limit in the
> virtio-blk driver seems unfair to other users. Maybe we should check if
> the device is behind a hardware IOMMU before using the DMA API?
Hmm, this looks more like the virtio_block dev...
2017 Jan 06
2
[RFC PATCH] vring: Force use of DMA API for ARM-based systems
...] [<ffff00000856d99c>] __virtblk_add_req+0x9c/0x1a8
> ...
> [ 5.384449] [<ffff0000081829c4>] ondemand_readahead+0xfc/0x2b8
>
> Commit 9491ae4 caps the read-ahead request to a limit set by the backing
> device. For virtio-blk, it is infinite (as set by the call to
> blk_queue_max_hw_sectors in virtblk_probe).
>
> I'm not sure how to fix this. Setting an arbitrary sector limit in the
> virtio-blk driver seems unfair to other users. Maybe we should check if
> the device is behind a hardware IOMMU before using the DMA API?
Hmm, this looks more like the virtio_block dev...
2016 Dec 20
4
[RFC PATCH] vring: Force use of DMA API for ARM-based systems
Booting Linux on an ARM fastmodel containing an SMMU emulation results
in an unexpected I/O page fault from the legacy virtio-blk PCI device:
[ 1.211721] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: event 0x10 received:
[ 1.211800] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000000fffff010
[ 1.211880] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x0000020800000000
[ 1.211959] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000008fa081002
[
2016 Dec 20
4
[RFC PATCH] vring: Force use of DMA API for ARM-based systems
Booting Linux on an ARM fastmodel containing an SMMU emulation results
in an unexpected I/O page fault from the legacy virtio-blk PCI device:
[ 1.211721] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: event 0x10 received:
[ 1.211800] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000000fffff010
[ 1.211880] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x0000020800000000
[ 1.211959] arm-smmu-v3 2b400000.smmu: 0x00000008fa081002
[
2013 May 13
22
[PATCH] xen-blk(front|back): Handle large physical sector disks
...fo = gd->private_data;
@@ -564,6 +565,7 @@ static int xlvbd_init_blk_queue(struct gendisk *gd, u16
sector_size)
/* Hard sector size and max sectors impersonate the equiv. hardware. */
blk_queue_logical_block_size(rq, sector_size);
+ blk_queue_physical_block_size(rq, physical_sector_size);
blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(rq, 512);
/* Each segment in a request is up to an aligned page in size. */
@@ -667,7 +669,8 @@ static char *encode_disk_name(char *ptr, unsigned int n)
static int xlvbd_alloc_gendisk(blkif_sector_t capacity,
struct blkfront_info *info,
- u16 vdisk_info, u16 sector_size)
+...
2018 Apr 05
0
[RFC PATCH 2/2] virtio_blk: add new module parameter to set max request size
...blk_status_t virtblk_result(struct virtblk_req *vbr)
{
switch (vbr->status) {
@@ -730,8 +758,8 @@ static int virtblk_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
/* We can handle whatever the host told us to handle. */
blk_queue_max_segments(q, vblk->sg_elems-2);
- /* No real sector limit. */
- blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(q, -1U);
+ /* No real sector limit, use 512b (max_request_size << 10) >> 9 */
+ blk_queue_max_hw_sectors_no_limit(q, max_request_size << 1);
/* Host can optionally specify maximum segment size and number of
* segments. */
--
2.9.4
2019 Feb 07
0
[PATCH v7 5/5] virtio-blk: Consider virtio_max_dma_size() for maximum segment size
...uest_queue *q;
int err, index;
- u32 v, blk_size, sg_elems, opt_io_size;
+ u32 v, blk_size, max_size, sg_elems, opt_io_size;
u16 min_io_size;
u8 physical_block_exp, alignment_offset;
@@ -826,14 +826,16 @@ static int virtblk_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
/* No real sector limit. */
blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(q, -1U);
+ max_size = virtio_max_dma_size(vdev);
+
/* Host can optionally specify maximum segment size and number of
* segments. */
err = virtio_cread_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_BLK_F_SIZE_MAX,
struct virtio_blk_config, size_max, &v);
if (!err)
- blk_queue_max_segment_size(q, v);...
2023 Sep 04
1
[PATCH] virtio-blk: fix implicit overflow on virtio_max_dma_size
...ck_exp, alignment_offset;
unsigned int queue_depth;
+ size_t max_dma_size;
if (!vdev->config->get) {
dev_err(&vdev->dev, "%s failure: config access disabled\n",
@@ -1411,7 +1412,8 @@ static int virtblk_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
/* No real sector limit. */
blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(q, UINT_MAX);
- max_size = virtio_max_dma_size(vdev);
+ max_dma_size = virtio_max_dma_size(vdev);
+ max_size = max_dma_size > U32_MAX ? U32_MAX : max_dma_size;
/* Host can optionally specify maximum segment size and number of
* segments. */
--
2.34.1
2017 Jan 09
0
[RFC PATCH] vring: Force use of DMA API for ARM-based systems
.....
> >>> [ 5.384449] [<ffff0000081829c4>] ondemand_readahead+0xfc/0x2b8
> >>>
> >>> Commit 9491ae4 caps the read-ahead request to a limit set by the backing
> >>> device. For virtio-blk, it is infinite (as set by the call to
> >>> blk_queue_max_hw_sectors in virtblk_probe).
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure how to fix this. Setting an arbitrary sector limit in the
> >>> virtio-blk driver seems unfair to other users. Maybe we should check if
> >>> the device is behind a hardware IOMMU before using the DMA A...
2011 Sep 01
9
[PATCH V4 0/3] xen-blkfront/blkback discard support
Dear list,
This is the V4 of the trim support for xen-blkfront/blkback,
Now we move BLKIF_OP_TRIM to BLKIF_OP_DISCARD, and dropped all
"trim" stuffs in the patches, and use "discard" instead.
Also we updated the helpers of blkif_x86_{32|64}_request or we
will meet problems using a non-native protocol.
And this patch has been tested with both SSD and raw file,
with SSD we will
2017 Jan 06
0
[RFC PATCH] vring: Force use of DMA API for ARM-based systems
...>] __virtblk_add_req+0x9c/0x1a8
>> ...
>> [ 5.384449] [<ffff0000081829c4>] ondemand_readahead+0xfc/0x2b8
>>
>> Commit 9491ae4 caps the read-ahead request to a limit set by the backing
>> device. For virtio-blk, it is infinite (as set by the call to
>> blk_queue_max_hw_sectors in virtblk_probe).
>>
>> I'm not sure how to fix this. Setting an arbitrary sector limit in the
>> virtio-blk driver seems unfair to other users. Maybe we should check if
>> the device is behind a hardware IOMMU before using the DMA API?
>
> Hmm, this looks more l...
2017 Jan 06
0
[RFC PATCH] vring: Force use of DMA API for ARM-based systems
..._sgs+0x2ec/0x4e8
[ 5.383505] [<ffff00000856d99c>] __virtblk_add_req+0x9c/0x1a8
...
[ 5.384449] [<ffff0000081829c4>] ondemand_readahead+0xfc/0x2b8
Commit 9491ae4 caps the read-ahead request to a limit set by the backing
device. For virtio-blk, it is infinite (as set by the call to
blk_queue_max_hw_sectors in virtblk_probe).
I'm not sure how to fix this. Setting an arbitrary sector limit in the
virtio-blk driver seems unfair to other users. Maybe we should check if
the device is behind a hardware IOMMU before using the DMA API?
Thanks,
Jean-Philippe
> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto at kernel...
2017 Jan 09
0
[RFC PATCH] vring: Force use of DMA API for ARM-based systems
.....
> >>> [ 5.384449] [<ffff0000081829c4>] ondemand_readahead+0xfc/0x2b8
> >>>
> >>> Commit 9491ae4 caps the read-ahead request to a limit set by the backing
> >>> device. For virtio-blk, it is infinite (as set by the call to
> >>> blk_queue_max_hw_sectors in virtblk_probe).
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure how to fix this. Setting an arbitrary sector limit in the
> >>> virtio-blk driver seems unfair to other users. Maybe we should check if
> >>> the device is behind a hardware IOMMU before using the DMA A...
2019 Feb 07
5
[PATCH v7 0/5] Fix virtio-blk issue with SWIOTLB
Hi,
here is the next version of this patch-set. Previous
versions can be found here:
V1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190110134433.15672-1-joro at 8bytes.org/
V2: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190115132257.6426-1-joro at 8bytes.org/
V3: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190123163049.24863-1-joro at 8bytes.org/
V4: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190129084342.26030-1-joro at 8bytes.org/
2012 May 21
6
[RFC PATCH 1/5] block: Introduce q->abort_queue_fn()
...lk_queue_make_request(struct request_queue *, make_request_fn *);
+extern void blk_queue_abort_queue(struct request_queue *, abort_queue_fn *);
extern void blk_queue_bounce_limit(struct request_queue *, u64);
extern void blk_limits_max_hw_sectors(struct queue_limits *, unsigned int);
extern void blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(struct request_queue *, unsigned int);
--
1.7.10.1