From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56840)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1XR09d-0004OL-Db
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Sep 2014 10:42:59 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1XR09X-0000ZG-5e
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Sep 2014 10:42:53 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58818)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1XR09W-0000Z8-V3
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 08 Sep 2014 10:42:47 -0400
Message-ID: <540DC059.4000907@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 16:42:33 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1409935888-18552-1-git-send-email-pl@kamp.de>
	<1409935888-18552-3-git-send-email-pl@kamp.de>
	<20140908134434.GB22582@irqsave.net>
	<540DB3E2.6010905@redhat.com> <540DB583.4030101@kamp.de>
	<540DB5EB.2070705@redhat.com> <540DBEBD.9040701@kamp.de>
In-Reply-To: <540DBEBD.9040701@kamp.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/4] block: immediately cancel oversized
 read/write requests
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Lieven <pl@kamp.de>, =?windows-1252?Q?Beno=EEt_Canet?= <benoit.canet@irqsave.net>
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, ronniesahlberg@gmail.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com, mreitz@redhat.com

Il 08/09/2014 16:35, Peter Lieven ha scritto:
>>>>
>>>> messages. :)
>>> So you would not throw an error msg here?
>> No, though a trace could be useful.
> 
> Is there a howto somewhere how to implement that?

Try commit 4ac4458076e1aaf3b01a6361154117df20e22215.

> Whats your opinion changed the max_xfer_len to 0xffff regardsless
> of use_16_for_rw in iSCSI?

If you implemented request splitting in the block layer, it would be
okay to force max_xfer_len to 0xffff.

Paolo