On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 05:05:49PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jun 2019, shuah wrote:
>
> > I missed a lot of the thread info. and went looking for it and found the
> > following summary of the problem:
> >
> > ==
> > The issue which prompted the commit this thread is ab
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019, shuah wrote:
> I missed a lot of the thread info. and went looking for it and found the
> following summary of the problem:
>
> ==
> The issue which prompted the commit this thread is about arose in a
> situation where the block layer set up a scatterlist cont
Hi Alan,
On 6/18/19 9:28 AM, shuah wrote:
On 6/14/19 8:44 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jun 2019, shuah wrote:
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 i
On 6/14/19 8:44 AM, Alan Stern wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jun 2019, shuah wrote:
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 a
On Thu, 13 Jun 2019, shuah wrote:
> > 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 poin
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
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 01:16:32PM -0400, 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
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 hand
Christoph,
> sd.c only supports a few specific sector size, and none of them is
> < 512 bytes:
Yep, while sd.c in theory supported 256-byte logical blocks a while
back, that code was removed since the block layer always operates on
units of 512 bytes.
--
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux E
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 a
Hi Christoph,
> From: Christoph Hellwig, Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 8:31 PM
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 08:52:21AM +, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote:
> > Hi Christoph,
> >
> > > From: Christoph Hellwig, Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 4:31 PM
> > >
> > > First things first:
> > >
> > > Yoshihiro,
On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:46:06PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > > Thay is someething the virt_boundary prevents. But could still give
> > > you something like:
> > >
> > > 1536 4096 4096 1024
> > >
> > > or
> > > 1536 16384 8192 4096 16384
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 01:46:06PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Thay is someething the virt_boundary prevents. But could still give
> > you something like:
> >
> > 1536 4096 4096 1024
> >
> > or
> > 1536 16384 8192 4096 16384 512
>
> That would kill the driver, if maxpacket were 1024
Am Mittwoch, den 12.06.2019, 09:30 +0200 schrieb Christoph Hellwig:
>
> So based on the above I'm a little confused about the actual requirement
> again. Can you still split the SCSI command into multiple URBs? And
Yes. The device sees only a number of packets over the wire. They can
come from
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 08:52:21AM +, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote:
> Hi Christoph,
>
> > From: Christoph Hellwig, Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 4:31 PM
> >
> > First things first:
> >
> > Yoshihiro, can you try this git branch? The new bits are just the three
> > patches at the end, but they s
Hi Christoph,
> From: Christoph Hellwig, Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 4:31 PM
>
> First things first:
>
> Yoshihiro, can you try this git branch? The new bits are just the three
> patches at the end, but they sit on top of a few patches already sent
> out to the list, so a branch is probably
First things first:
Yoshihiro, can you try this git branch? The new bits are just the three
patches at the end, but they sit on top of a few patches already sent
out to the list, so a branch is probably either:
git://git.infradead.org/users/hch/misc.git scsi-virt-boundary-fixes
Gitweb:
On Tue, 11 Jun 2019, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Hi Alan,
>
> thanks for the explanation. It seems like what usb wants is to:
>
> - set sg_tablesize to 1 for devices that can't handle scatterlist at all
Hmmm. usb-storage (and possible other drivers too) currently handles
such controllers by s
Hi Christoph, Alan,
> From: Alan Stern, Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 3:46 AM
>
> On Mon, 10 Jun 2019, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> > Hi Yoshihiro,
> >
> > sorry for not taking care of this earlier, today is a public holiday
> > here and thus I'm not working much over the long weekend.
To Christ
Hi Alan,
thanks for the explanation. It seems like what usb wants is to:
- set sg_tablesize to 1 for devices that can't handle scatterlist at all
- set the virt boundary as-is for devices supporting "basic" scatterlist,
although that still assumes they can rejiggle them because for example
On Mon, 10 Jun 2019, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Hi Yoshihiro,
>
> sorry for not taking care of this earlier, today is a public holiday
> here and thus I'm not working much over the long weekend.
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 11:13:07AM +, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote:
> > I have another way to avoi
Hi Yoshihiro,
sorry for not taking care of this earlier, today is a public holiday
here and thus I'm not working much over the long weekend.
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 11:13:07AM +, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote:
> I have another way to avoid the issue. But it doesn't seem that a good way
> though...
Hi Christoph, Alan,
(add linux-usb ML on CC.)
> From: Yoshihiro Shimoda, Sent: Friday, June 7, 2019 9:00 PM
>
> Hi Christoph,
>
> I think we should continue to discuss on this email thread instead of the
> fixed DMA-API.txt patch [1]
>
> [1]
> https://marc.info/?t=15598941221&r=1&w=2
>
>
full (sz: 1003520
bytes), total 32768 (slots), used 1088 (slots)
Regards,
Biju
> Subject: RE: How to resolve an issue in swiotlb environment?
>
> Hi Christoph,
>
> I think we should continue to discuss on this email thread instead of the
> fixed
> DMA-API.txt patch [1]
>
Hi Christoph,
I think we should continue to discuss on this email thread instead of the fixed
DMA-API.txt patch [1]
[1]
https://marc.info/?t=15598941221&r=1&w=2
> From: Yoshihiro Shimoda, Sent: Monday, June 3, 2019 3:42 PM
>
> Hi linux-block and iommu mailing lists,
>
> I have an issue th
25 matches
Mail list logo
