[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 1/3] block: Add blk_queue_copy_limits()



>>>>> "Jun'ichi" == Jun'ichi Nomura <j-nomura ce jp nec com> writes:

+	if (q->limits.max_sectors == 0 || q->limits.max_hw_sectors == 0)
+		blk_queue_max_sectors(q, SAFE_MAX_SECTORS);

I'm really not keen on perpetuating SAFE_MAX_SECTORS for something that
was written in this millennium.

I'd much rather we just do this, then:

block: Set max_sectors correctly for stacking devices

The topology changes unintentionally caused SAFE_MAX_SECTORS to be set
for stacking devices.  Set the default limit to BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS and
provide SAFE_MAX_SECTORS in blk_queue_make_request() for legacy hw
drivers that depend on the old behavior.

Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin petersen oracle com>

---

diff --git a/block/blk-settings.c b/block/blk-settings.c
index 83413ff..cd9b730 100644
--- a/block/blk-settings.c
+++ b/block/blk-settings.c
@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ void blk_set_default_limits(struct queue_limits *lim)
 	lim->max_hw_segments = MAX_HW_SEGMENTS;
 	lim->seg_boundary_mask = BLK_SEG_BOUNDARY_MASK;
 	lim->max_segment_size = MAX_SEGMENT_SIZE;
-	lim->max_sectors = lim->max_hw_sectors = SAFE_MAX_SECTORS;
+	lim->max_sectors = lim->max_hw_sectors = BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS;
 	lim->logical_block_size = lim->physical_block_size = lim->io_min = 512;
 	lim->bounce_pfn = (unsigned long)(BLK_BOUNCE_ANY >> PAGE_SHIFT);
 	lim->alignment_offset = 0;
@@ -164,6 +164,7 @@ void blk_queue_make_request(struct request_queue *q, make_request_fn *mfn)
 	q->unplug_timer.data = (unsigned long)q;
 
 	blk_set_default_limits(&q->limits);
+	blk_queue_max_sectors(q, SAFE_MAX_SECTORS);
 
 	/*
 	 * If the caller didn't supply a lock, fall back to our embedded



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]