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=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable 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 12C6FC468B0 for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2019 23:01:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF90521537 for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2019 23:01:07 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1560466867; bh=ijAoTvben3xHdJwjFjc2JVq20l3k6CT0SJjNIni16EE=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=py96+Jwa2hpARq3mst+rgATY+ZUVczaDRwOhbTp84DDydbZXEDTZKN2OHhxpGxenO d6WHwP6dHYpQ6IvoNhBAyL4RtKGVNE3orG004iP6or+FJMQcQVPJHISuaAPtkY4YDs FZzoL/8cX56/PDs9m/HoeYdT+2DMgIC/56GT1ySA= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727028AbfFMXBH (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jun 2019 19:01:07 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:42192 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726296AbfFMXBH (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jun 2019 19:01:07 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.112] (c-24-9-64-241.hsd1.co.comcast.net [24.9.64.241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C71622147A; Thu, 13 Jun 2019 23:01:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1560466866; bh=ijAoTvben3xHdJwjFjc2JVq20l3k6CT0SJjNIni16EE=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=l7CW3kEbIEfMPyQKq84ka0PeuSuwdqPEd/rBwzyb+r1FqLLqyErPP9Iw42L52TmB5 2Uy1rIkSbsHxHYYCWBq3FZuNZTXRsZ2QRyHKWJRpBXggeBKNkX5qMpxYhhmmT5vXeb r3sXe5wfp6Fftm3kLieDRdFmX+o6d0kmUyHdR3fc= Subject: Re: How to resolve an issue in swiotlb environment? To: Alan Stern , Christoph Hellwig , Valentina Manea Cc: Oliver Neukum , "iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org" , Yoshihiro Shimoda , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , Linux-Renesas , "linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" , shuah References: From: shuah Message-ID: <41caad16-3fa1-413b-0d49-594d48b88de4@kernel.org> Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 17:01:05 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On 6/13/19 11:16 AM, Alan Stern wrote: > On Thu, 13 Jun 2019, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 10:43:11AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: >>> Would it be okay to rely on the assumption that USB block devices never >>> have block size < 512? (We could even add code to the driver to >>> enforce this, although refusing to handle such devices at all might be >>> worse than getting an occasional error.) >> >> sd.c only supports a few specific sector size, and none of them is >> < 512 bytes: >> >> if (sector_size != 512 && >> sector_size != 1024 && >> sector_size != 2048 && >> sector_size != 4096) { >> ... >> sdkp->capacity = 0; > > Great! So all we have to do is fix vhci-hcd. Then we can remove all > the virt_boundary_mask stuff from usb-storage and uas entirely. > > (I'm assuming wireless USB isn't a genuine issue. As far as I know, it > is pretty much abandoned at this point.) > > Valentina and Shua: Adding SG support to vhci-hcd shouldn't be too > hard. It ought to be possible even without changing the network > protocol. > I will start taking a look at this. Is there a target release in plan to drop virt_boundary_mask stuff? thanks, -- Shuah