From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98812C4332B for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 07:17:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72EC02076A for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 07:17:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727261AbgCXHRF (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2020 03:17:05 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:48592 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725905AbgCXHRE (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2020 03:17:04 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5258CACA1; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 07:17:02 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH] block, nvme: Increase max segments parameter setting value To: Tokunori Ikegami , linux-block@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org References: <20200323182324.3243-1-ikegami.t@gmail.com> From: Hannes Reinecke Message-ID: <2293733b-77d7-6fbb-a81a-b68c10656757@suse.de> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 08:16:56 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200323182324.3243-1-ikegami.t@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On 3/23/20 7:23 PM, Tokunori Ikegami wrote: > Currently data length can be specified as UINT_MAX but failed. > This is caused by the max segments parameter limit set as USHRT_MAX. > To resolve this issue change to increase the value limit range. > > Signed-off-by: Tokunori Ikegami > Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org > Cc: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org > --- > block/blk-settings.c | 2 +- > drivers/nvme/host/core.c | 2 +- > include/linux/blkdev.h | 7 ++++--- > 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/block/blk-settings.c b/block/blk-settings.c > index c8eda2e7b91e..ed40bda573c2 100644 > --- a/block/blk-settings.c > +++ b/block/blk-settings.c > @@ -266,7 +266,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_queue_max_write_zeroes_sectors); > * Enables a low level driver to set an upper limit on the number of > * hw data segments in a request. > **/ > -void blk_queue_max_segments(struct request_queue *q, unsigned short max_segments) > +void blk_queue_max_segments(struct request_queue *q, unsigned int max_segments) > { > if (!max_segments) { > max_segments = 1; > diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/core.c b/drivers/nvme/host/core.c > index a4d8c90ee7cc..2b48aab0969e 100644 > --- a/drivers/nvme/host/core.c > +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/core.c > @@ -2193,7 +2193,7 @@ static void nvme_set_queue_limits(struct nvme_ctrl *ctrl, > > max_segments = min_not_zero(max_segments, ctrl->max_segments); > blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(q, ctrl->max_hw_sectors); > - blk_queue_max_segments(q, min_t(u32, max_segments, USHRT_MAX)); > + blk_queue_max_segments(q, min_t(u32, max_segments, UINT_MAX)); > } > if ((ctrl->quirks & NVME_QUIRK_STRIPE_SIZE) && > is_power_of_2(ctrl->max_hw_sectors)) > diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h > index f629d40c645c..4f4224e20c28 100644 > --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h > +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h > @@ -338,8 +338,8 @@ struct queue_limits { > unsigned int max_write_zeroes_sectors; > unsigned int discard_granularity; > unsigned int discard_alignment; > + unsigned int max_segments; > > - unsigned short max_segments; > unsigned short max_integrity_segments; > unsigned short max_discard_segments; > > @@ -1067,7 +1067,8 @@ extern void blk_queue_make_request(struct request_queue *, make_request_fn *); > extern void blk_queue_bounce_limit(struct request_queue *, u64); > extern void blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(struct request_queue *, unsigned int); > extern void blk_queue_chunk_sectors(struct request_queue *, unsigned int); > -extern void blk_queue_max_segments(struct request_queue *, unsigned short); > +extern void blk_queue_max_segments(struct request_queue *q, > + unsigned int max_segments); > extern void blk_queue_max_discard_segments(struct request_queue *, > unsigned short); > extern void blk_queue_max_segment_size(struct request_queue *, unsigned int); > @@ -1276,7 +1277,7 @@ static inline unsigned int queue_max_hw_sectors(const struct request_queue *q) > return q->limits.max_hw_sectors; > } > > -static inline unsigned short queue_max_segments(const struct request_queue *q) > +static inline unsigned int queue_max_segments(const struct request_queue *q) > { > return q->limits.max_segments; > } > One would assume that the same reasoning goes for max_integrity_segment, no? Otherwise looks good. Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke Cheers, Hannes -- Dr. Hannes Reinecke Teamlead Storage & Networking hare@suse.de +49 911 74053 688 SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer