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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3F97C433F5 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 01:37:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236896AbiAJBha (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Jan 2022 20:37:30 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56558 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237853AbiAJBha (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Jan 2022 20:37:30 -0500 Received: from mail-ua1-x92c.google.com (mail-ua1-x92c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::92c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7162AC06173F for ; Sun, 9 Jan 2022 17:37:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ua1-x92c.google.com with SMTP id i5so20809307uaq.10 for ; Sun, 09 Jan 2022 17:37:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=DdH5Jl/JF3RbYbOKGoTmW1vfPEemFE0sOCwMifN6nws=; b=PSAbqpMCTFVypHe6qu5S6kF0SjtwkOn4ZIT428iZpaZWX7+t4Hn1lyK/DHp0/6rdjd DKABV4mM6ccdSAvfFHO2VsF89rV7Aw9bMaESJ65Rvi8B1+EVzErh1PdDh2r9LNfMJ7Vi nb4K/q/dwnql8Q7P7fOdRZg808+gvBsC5oCUYg1FT1A2R5xhj/027W1LMel5VahTt2Jj Cfix03gQGS1JdVxhMSp+N7mdTxGR/ksp+X8/qWXfwQ2QsKgEunZUl8hr7eu2vkwgHIyf ckL8iugQKzRvF/Q+GXn+oo/zn0S72J40Uq6hDA/vuMBlzBM1xvoSQi6VY1br+i1eneOa AjGA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=DdH5Jl/JF3RbYbOKGoTmW1vfPEemFE0sOCwMifN6nws=; b=lIjK5K3phaQbR+aXpDDtTFrl0Tncrb3w5H5F1GuCoXd06xCSCpd3aBx4axK/JijS/k BcGK9p7HRBl1P7i6S+jObk6JxWxONONTq3vRGHdk5KbL48XIOvEb0OGEDQwonrSbRnO1 694hG93hVFR25HiXrISADgg9u3eUIWl6DLt7wZ001O9Gs45FmvjUEfr65s4DUjPZMXDW 4oPie4P/z4F6TyreeAzBSpiqmUTlXr/ucj1up7Zp37aJk/b+zI9OE4NwIoSAy6V2b9lA iScEqcL/yCprnzA1X1iZp096Dss3fcFxHCXEDLTUbLwoU6580WEb1MLHlwb5c8nWUsbM R/uw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532sQp80/a2moYhjaaRRmfe+EaDwAXfuif/XTqYrRYdGliTS6yZI Yzb8OGpRWfMj12f/LwSXS6BzItAoJR8Sg/1dtkw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzbRt7kqn94wJ0DRoQ4qSBkvD7W4sADChseXylRB3b3WBlhXqatgSPWv1yy/z5YQiJaNw3j+9v2DAXeSRU3SNU= X-Received: by 2002:a67:2f58:: with SMTP id v85mr2153390vsv.13.1641778648530; Sun, 09 Jan 2022 17:37:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220107054531.619487-1-hyc.lee@gmail.com> <20220107054531.619487-2-hyc.lee@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Hyunchul Lee Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 10:37:17 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ksmbd: smbd: change the default maximum read/write, receive size To: Namjae Jeon Cc: Steve French , Sergey Senozhatsky , CIFS Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org 2022=EB=85=84 1=EC=9B=94 9=EC=9D=BC (=EC=9D=BC) =EC=98=A4=ED=9B=84 9:56, Na= mjae Jeon =EB=8B=98=EC=9D=B4 =EC=9E=91=EC=84=B1: > > 2022-01-09 15:44 GMT+09:00, Steve French : > > Do you have more detail on what the negotiated readsize/writesize > > would be for Windows clients with this size? for Linux clients? > Hyunchul, Please answer. > For a Linux client, if connected using smb-direct, the size will be 1048512. But connected with multichannel, the size will be 4MB instead of 1048512. And this causes problems because the read/write size is bigger than 1048512. It looks like a bug. I have to limit the ksmbd's SMB2 maximum read/write size for a test. For Windows clients, the actual read/write size is less than 1048512. > > > > It looked like it would still be 4MB at first glance (although in > > theory some Windows could do 8MB) ... I may have missed something > I understood that multiple-buffer descriptor support was required to > set a read/write size of 1MB or more. As I know, Hyunchul is currently > working on it. > It seems to be set to the smaller of max read/write size in smb-direct > negotiate and max read/write size in smb2 negotiate. > > Hyunchul, I have one question more, How did you get 1048512 setting value= ? > > I remember when the size was 1MB, Windows clients requested read/write with 1048512 and 64. > > On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 8:43 PM Namjae Jeon wrot= e: > >> > >> 2022-01-07 14:45 GMT+09:00, Hyunchul Lee : > >> > Due to restriction that cannot handle multiple > >> > buffer descriptor structures, decrease the maximum > >> > read/write size for Windows clients. > >> > > >> > And set the maximum fragmented receive size > >> > in consideration of the receive queue size. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Hyunchul Lee > >> Acked-by: Namjae Jeon > > > > > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > > > Steve > > -- Thanks, Hyunchul