Re: [PATCH v6 0/2] Block layer support ZAC/ZBC commands

2016-08-09 Thread Damien Le Moal
Shaun, On 8/10/16 12:58, Shaun Tancheff wrote: On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Damien Le Moal wrote: On Aug 9, 2016, at 15:47, Hannes Reinecke wrote: [trim] Since disk type == 0 for everything that isn't HM so I would prefer the sysfs 'zoned' file just report if the drive is HA or HM. O

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] libata-core: do not set dev->max_sectors for LBA48 devices

2016-08-09 Thread Tejun Heo
Hello, On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 10:45:47PM +0800, tom.t...@gmail.com wrote: > From: Tom Yan > > Currently block layer limit max_hw_sectors is set to > ATA_MAX_SECTORS_LBA48 (65535), for devices with LBA48 support. > > However, block layer limit max_sectors (which is the effective > one; also adj

Re: [PATCH v6 0/2] Block layer support ZAC/ZBC commands

2016-08-09 Thread Shaun Tancheff
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Damien Le Moal wrote: >> On Aug 9, 2016, at 15:47, Hannes Reinecke wrote: [trim] >>> Since disk type == 0 for everything that isn't HM so I would prefer the >>> sysfs 'zoned' file just report if the drive is HA or HM. >>> >> Okay. So let's put in the 'zoned' attr

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] blk-mq: fix hang caused by freeze/unfreeze sequence

2016-08-09 Thread Tejun Heo
Hello, On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 01:39:08PM +0200, Roman Pen wrote: > Long time ago there was a similar fix proposed by Akinobu Mita[1], > but it seems that time everyone decided to fix this subtle race in > percpu-refcount and Tejun Heo[2] did an attempt (as I can see that > patchset was not applie

Re: Regarding AHCI_MAX_SG and (ATA_HORKAGE_MAX_SEC_1024)

2016-08-09 Thread Tejun Heo
Hello, Tom. On Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 10:10:17PM +0800, Tom Yan wrote: > So the (not so) recent bump of BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS from 1024 to 2560 > (commit d2be537c3ba3) seemed to have caused trouble to some of the ATA > devices, which were then worked around with ATA_HORKAGE_MAX_SEC_1024. > > However,

Re: [PATCH v6 0/2] Block layer support ZAC/ZBC commands

2016-08-09 Thread Shaun Tancheff
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:47 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > On 08/05/2016 10:35 PM, Shaun Tancheff wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 8:29 PM, Damien Le Moal >> wrote: On Aug 2, 2016, at 23:35, Hannes Reinecke wrote: On 08/01/2016 07:07 PM, Shaun Tancheff wrote: > On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 a

[PATCH] mm, hugetlb: switch hugetlbfs to multi-order radix-tree entries

2016-08-09 Thread Naoya Horiguchi
Hi Kirill, I wrote a patch to switch hugetlbfs to multi-order radix tree. Hopefully it's queued to your series. Thanks, Naoya Horiguchi --- From: Naoya Horiguchi Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 09:49:09 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] mm, hugetlb: switch hugetlbfs to multi-order radix-tree entries Currently, hu

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] libata-core: do not set dev->max_sectors for LBA48 devices

2016-08-09 Thread Sergei Shtylyov
Hello. On 08/09/2016 05:45 PM, tom.t...@gmail.com wrote: From: Tom Yan Currently block layer limit max_hw_sectors is set to ATA_MAX_SECTORS_LBA48 (65535), for devices with LBA48 support. However, block layer limit max_sectors (which is the effective one; also adjustable, upper-bounded by max

[PATCH v2 1/2] libata-scsi: set max_hw_sectors again only when dev->max_sectors is set

2016-08-09 Thread tom . ty89
From: Tom Yan When the request queue is initialized (see __scsi_init_queue() in scsi_lib.c), the block layer limit max_hw_sectors is set to shost->max_sectors, which will be set to the "machine infinity" SCSI_DEFAULT_MAX_SECTORS (currently 1024) if sht->max_sectors is not set (see scsi_host_alloc

[PATCH v2 2/2] libata-core: do not set dev->max_sectors for LBA48 devices

2016-08-09 Thread tom . ty89
From: Tom Yan Currently block layer limit max_hw_sectors is set to ATA_MAX_SECTORS_LBA48 (65535), for devices with LBA48 support. However, block layer limit max_sectors (which is the effective one; also adjustable, upper-bounded by max_hw_sectors) is set to BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS (currently 2560) b

Re: [PATCH 1/2] libata-scsi: do not call blk_queue_max_hw_sectors()

2016-08-09 Thread Tom Yan
Withdrawn. blk_queue_max_hw_sectors() is not called in hosts.c but in scsi_lib.c. However, it does not check the dev->max_sectors set in libata-core.c. So everything of this patch is wrong. Will rewrite and resend the second patch. On 9 August 2016 at 18:31, wrote: > From: Tom Yan > > We should

[PATCH 2/2] libata: do not set max_sectors for LBA48 device

2016-08-09 Thread tom . ty89
From: Tom Yan Along with commit 1dc8fff24187 ("libata-scsi: do not call blk_queue_max_hw_sectors()"), devices with LBA48 support will have max_sectors set to SCSI_DEFAULT_MAX_SECTORS (currently 1024), by the scsi driver. Note that the "max_sectors" here is actually the block layer limit "max_hw_

[PATCH 1/2] libata-scsi: do not call blk_queue_max_hw_sectors()

2016-08-09 Thread tom . ty89
From: Tom Yan We should just let the scsi driver (hosts.c) call the function. It has better heuristic anyway (i.e. use SCSI_DEFAULT_MAX_SECTORS as fallback when max_sectors is not set). diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c index 2bdb5da..495d916 100644 --- a/drivers

Re: [PATCH v6 0/2] Block layer support ZAC/ZBC commands

2016-08-09 Thread Damien Le Moal
Hannes, > On Aug 9, 2016, at 15:47, Hannes Reinecke wrote: [...] >>> >>> Can we agree on an interface ? >>> Summarizing all the discussions we had, I am all in favor of the following: >>> >>> 1) A "zone_size" sysfs attribute to indicate that a drive is zoned: >>> The already existing device typ