From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
Gopal Tiwari <gtiwari@redhat.com>,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>,
dmilburn@redhat.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/15] nvme-pci: do not build a scatterlist to map metadata
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:02:57 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190912010256.GB2731@ming.t460p> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190828092057.GA15524@ming.t460p>
On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 05:20:57PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 04:10:32PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > We always have exactly one segment, so we can simply call dma_map_bvec.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> > ---
> > drivers/nvme/host/pci.c | 23 ++++++++++-------------
> > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c b/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
> > index bc4ee869fe82..a7dad24e0406 100644
> > --- a/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
> > @@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ struct nvme_iod {
> > int npages; /* In the PRP list. 0 means small pool in use */
> > int nents; /* Used in scatterlist */
> > dma_addr_t first_dma;
> > - struct scatterlist meta_sg; /* metadata requires single contiguous buffer */
> > + dma_addr_t meta_dma;
> > struct scatterlist *sg;
> > struct scatterlist inline_sg[0];
> > };
> > @@ -592,13 +592,16 @@ static void nvme_unmap_data(struct nvme_dev *dev, struct request *req)
> > dma_addr_t dma_addr = iod->first_dma, next_dma_addr;
> > int i;
> >
> > + if (blk_integrity_rq(req)) {
> > + dma_unmap_page(dev->dev, iod->meta_dma,
> > + rq_integrity_vec(req)->bv_len, dma_dir);
> > + }
> > +
> > if (iod->nents) {
> > /* P2PDMA requests do not need to be unmapped */
> > if (!is_pci_p2pdma_page(sg_page(iod->sg)))
> > dma_unmap_sg(dev->dev, iod->sg, iod->nents, dma_dir);
> >
> > - if (blk_integrity_rq(req))
> > - dma_unmap_sg(dev->dev, &iod->meta_sg, 1, dma_dir);
> > }
> >
> > if (iod->npages == 0)
> > @@ -861,17 +864,11 @@ static blk_status_t nvme_map_data(struct nvme_dev *dev, struct request *req,
> >
> > ret = BLK_STS_IOERR;
> > if (blk_integrity_rq(req)) {
> > - if (blk_rq_count_integrity_sg(q, req->bio) != 1)
> > - goto out;
> > -
> > - sg_init_table(&iod->meta_sg, 1);
> > - if (blk_rq_map_integrity_sg(q, req->bio, &iod->meta_sg) != 1)
> > - goto out;
> > -
> > - if (!dma_map_sg(dev->dev, &iod->meta_sg, 1, dma_dir))
> > + iod->meta_dma = dma_map_bvec(dev->dev, rq_integrity_vec(req),
> > + dma_dir, 0);
>
> Hi Christoph,
>
> When one bio is enough big, the generated integrity data could cross
> more than one pages even though the data is still in single segment.
>
> However, we don't convert to multi-page bvec for bio_integrity_prep(),
> and each page may consume one bvec, so is it possible for this patch to
> cause issues in case of NVMe's protection? Since this patch supposes
> that there is only one bvec for integrity data.
>
> BTW, not see such kind of report, just a concern in theory.
Hello Christoph,
Gently ping...
Thanks,
Ming
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvme mailing list
Linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-12 1:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-21 23:10 [RFC] optimize nvme single segment I/O Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 01/15] block: add a req_bvec helper Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-25 5:07 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-03-27 14:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 02/15] block: add a rq_integrity_vec helper Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-25 5:10 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-03-27 14:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 03/15] block: add a rq_dma_dir helper Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-22 13:06 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2019-03-27 14:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-28 10:26 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2019-03-25 5:11 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 04/15] block: add dma_map_bvec helper Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-25 5:13 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 05/15] nvme-pci: remove the unused iod->length field Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-25 5:14 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 06/15] nvme-pci: remove nvme_init_iod Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-25 5:19 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-03-27 14:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 07/15] nvme-pci: move the call to nvme_cleanup_cmd out of nvme_unmap_data Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-25 5:21 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 08/15] nvme-pci: merge nvme_free_iod into nvme_unmap_data Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-25 5:22 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 09/15] nvme-pci: only call nvme_unmap_data for requests transferring data Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-25 5:23 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 10/15] nvme-pci: do not build a scatterlist to map metadata Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-25 5:27 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
[not found] ` <20190828092057.GA15524@ming.t460p>
2019-09-12 1:02 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2019-09-12 8:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 11/15] nvme-pci: split metadata handling from nvme_map_data / nvme_unmap_data Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-25 5:29 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 12/15] nvme-pci: remove the inline scatterlist optimization Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-25 5:30 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 13/15] nvme-pci: optimize mapping of small single segment requests Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-25 5:36 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 14/15] nvme-pci: optimize mapping single segment requests using SGLs Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-25 5:39 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-04-30 14:17 ` Klaus Birkelund
2019-04-30 14:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-21 23:10 ` [PATCH 15/15] nvme-pci: tidy up nvme_map_data Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-25 5:40 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-03-22 15:44 ` [RFC] optimize nvme single segment I/O Jens Axboe
2019-03-27 14:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-22 17:37 ` Keith Busch
2019-03-22 18:55 ` Sagi Grimberg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190912010256.GB2731@ming.t460p \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=dmilburn@redhat.com \
--cc=gtiwari@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).