[dm-devel] [PATCH 1/3] block: Add blk_queue_copy_limits()
Martin K. Petersen
martin.petersen at oracle.com
Mon Sep 21 19:43:19 UTC 2009
>>>>> "Jun'ichi" == Jun'ichi Nomura <j-nomura at ce.jp.nec.com> writes:
Jun'ichi> If we aren't sure, shouldn't we set its default to -1 or
Jun'ichi> putting comments in blk_set_default_limits() at least to avoid
Jun'ichi> possible confusion in future?
Jens, what do you think about this? Goes on top of what you have
queued...
block: Do not clamp max_hw_sectors for stacking devices
Stacking devices do not have an inherent max_hw_sector limit. Set the
default to INT_MAX so we are bounded only by capabilities of the
underlying storage.
Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen at oracle.com>
---
diff --git a/block/blk-settings.c b/block/blk-settings.c
index cd9b730..eaf122f 100644
--- a/block/blk-settings.c
+++ b/block/blk-settings.c
@@ -111,7 +111,8 @@ 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 = BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS;
+ lim->max_sectors = BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS;
+ lim->max_hw_sectors = INT_MAX;
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;
More information about the dm-devel
mailing list