Re: [PATCH v2] sd: Consider max_xfer_blocks if opt_xfer_blocks is unusable

On Thu, 03/30 11:30, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > Fam Zheng writes: > > >>rw_max = min_not_zero(logical_to_sectors(sdp, dev_max), > >> BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS); > > > > Yes, it is better. Is it okay to make the change when you apply? > > Sure.

Re: [PATCH v2] sd: Consider max_xfer_blocks if opt_xfer_blocks is unusable

On Thu, 03/30 11:30, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > Fam Zheng writes: > > >>rw_max = min_not_zero(logical_to_sectors(sdp, dev_max), > >> BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS); > > > > Yes, it is better. Is it okay to make the change when you apply? > > Sure. Applied to

Re: [PATCH v2] sd: Consider max_xfer_blocks if opt_xfer_blocks is unusable

Fam Zheng writes: >> rw_max = min_not_zero(logical_to_sectors(sdp, dev_max), >> BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS); > > Yes, it is better. Is it okay to make the change when you apply? Sure. Applied to 4.11/scsi-fixes. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle

Re: [PATCH v2] sd: Consider max_xfer_blocks if opt_xfer_blocks is unusable

Fam Zheng writes: >> rw_max = min_not_zero(logical_to_sectors(sdp, dev_max), >> BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS); > > Yes, it is better. Is it okay to make the change when you apply? Sure. Applied to 4.11/scsi-fixes. -- Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering

Re: [PATCH v2] sd: Consider max_xfer_blocks if opt_xfer_blocks is unusable

On Wed, 03/29 22:37, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > Fam Zheng writes: > > Fam, > > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd.c b/drivers/scsi/sd.c > > index fcfeddc..a5c7e67 100644 > > --- a/drivers/scsi/sd.c > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/sd.c > > @@ -2957,6 +2957,7 @@ static int

Re: [PATCH v2] sd: Consider max_xfer_blocks if opt_xfer_blocks is unusable

On Wed, 03/29 22:37, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > Fam Zheng writes: > > Fam, > > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd.c b/drivers/scsi/sd.c > > index fcfeddc..a5c7e67 100644 > > --- a/drivers/scsi/sd.c > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/sd.c > > @@ -2957,6 +2957,7 @@ static int sd_revalidate_disk(struct gendisk

Re: [PATCH v2] sd: Consider max_xfer_blocks if opt_xfer_blocks is unusable

Fam Zheng writes: Fam, > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd.c b/drivers/scsi/sd.c > index fcfeddc..a5c7e67 100644 > --- a/drivers/scsi/sd.c > +++ b/drivers/scsi/sd.c > @@ -2957,6 +2957,7 @@ static int sd_revalidate_disk(struct gendisk *disk) > rw_max =

Re: [PATCH v2] sd: Consider max_xfer_blocks if opt_xfer_blocks is unusable

Fam Zheng writes: Fam, > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd.c b/drivers/scsi/sd.c > index fcfeddc..a5c7e67 100644 > --- a/drivers/scsi/sd.c > +++ b/drivers/scsi/sd.c > @@ -2957,6 +2957,7 @@ static int sd_revalidate_disk(struct gendisk *disk) > rw_max = logical_to_sectors(sdp,

Re: [PATCH v2] sd: Consider max_xfer_blocks if opt_xfer_blocks is unusable

Hi Fam, [auto build test WARNING on scsi/for-next] [also build test WARNING on v4.11-rc4 next-20170327] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] url:

Re: [PATCH v2] sd: Consider max_xfer_blocks if opt_xfer_blocks is unusable

Hi Fam, [auto build test WARNING on scsi/for-next] [also build test WARNING on v4.11-rc4 next-20170327] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] url:

[PATCH v2] sd: Consider max_xfer_blocks if opt_xfer_blocks is unusable

If device reports a small max_xfer_blocks and a zero opt_xfer_blocks, we end up using BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS, which is wrong and r/w of that size may get error. Fixes: ca369d51b3e ("block/sd: Fix device-imposed transfer length limits") Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng --- v2: Fix

[PATCH v2] sd: Consider max_xfer_blocks if opt_xfer_blocks is unusable

If device reports a small max_xfer_blocks and a zero opt_xfer_blocks, we end up using BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS, which is wrong and r/w of that size may get error. Fixes: ca369d51b3e ("block/sd: Fix device-imposed transfer length limits") Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng --- v2: Fix granularity mismatch.