On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 03:24:44AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > How about below?
> > It actually reverts commit b49a0871 and adds patch at
> > https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2015-August/msg0.html
> >
> > Christoph, could you help to try it?
>
> Still causes hickups with my co
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 01:13:09PM -0700, Ming Lin wrote:
> How about below?
> It actually reverts commit b49a0871 and adds patch at
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/dm-devel/2015-August/msg0.html
>
> Christoph, could you help to try it?
Still causes hickups with my controller unfortunately.
On Wed, 2015-10-21 at 14:18 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21 2015 at 1:33pm -0400,
> Ming Lin wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2015-10-21 at 12:19 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 21 2015 at 12:02pm -0400,
> > > Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, Oct 14 2015 at 9:27am -0400,
On Wed, Oct 21 2015 at 1:33pm -0400,
Ming Lin wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-10-21 at 12:19 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 21 2015 at 12:02pm -0400,
> > Mike Snitzer wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Oct 14 2015 at 9:27am -0400,
> > > Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at
On Wed, 2015-10-21 at 12:19 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21 2015 at 12:02pm -0400,
> Mike Snitzer wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 14 2015 at 9:27am -0400,
> > Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:44:11AM -0700, Ming Lin wrote:
> > > > I just did a quick test with
On Wed, 2015-10-21 at 11:33 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21 2015 at 11:01am -0400,
> Ming Lin wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2015-10-21 at 09:39 -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> > > Christoph Hellwig writes:
> > >
> > > > Jens, Ming:
> > > >
> > > > are you fine with the one liner change to get bac
> "Mike" == Mike Snitzer writes:
>> That should work for all devices and for dm-thinp (and dm-cache) in
>> particular will ensure that all discards that are issued will be a
>> multiple of the underlying device's blocksize.
Mike> Jeff Moyer pointed out having req_sects be a factor of
Mike> d
On Wed, Oct 21 2015 at 12:02pm -0400,
Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14 2015 at 9:27am -0400,
> Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:44:11AM -0700, Ming Lin wrote:
> > > I just did a quick test with a Samsung 900G NVMe device.
> > > mkfs.xfs is OK on 4.3-rc5.
> > >
> >
On Wed, Oct 14 2015 at 9:27am -0400,
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:44:11AM -0700, Ming Lin wrote:
> > I just did a quick test with a Samsung 900G NVMe device.
> > mkfs.xfs is OK on 4.3-rc5.
> >
> > What's your device model? I may find a similar one to try.
>
> This is a
On Wed, Oct 21 2015 at 11:01am -0400,
Ming Lin wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-10-21 at 09:39 -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> > Christoph Hellwig writes:
> >
> > > Jens, Ming:
> > >
> > > are you fine with the one liner change to get back to the old I/O
> > > pattern? While it looks like the cards fault I'd
On Wed, 2015-10-21 at 09:39 -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig writes:
>
> > Jens, Ming:
> >
> > are you fine with the one liner change to get back to the old I/O
> > pattern? While it looks like the cards fault I'd like to avoid this
> > annoying regression.
>
> I'm not Jens or Ming,
Christoph Hellwig writes:
> Jens, Ming:
>
> are you fine with the one liner change to get back to the old I/O
> pattern? While it looks like the cards fault I'd like to avoid this
> annoying regression.
I'm not Jens or Ming, but your patch looks fine to me, though you'll
want to remove the MAX_
Jens, Ming:
are you fine with the one liner change to get back to the old I/O
pattern? While it looks like the cards fault I'd like to avoid this
annoying regression.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
M
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 04:38:50PM +, Keith Busch wrote:
> I see why the proposal is an improvement, but I don't understand why the
> current situation results in a hang. Are we missing some kind of error
> recovery in the driver?
The driver tries to abort the commands and eventually gets into
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Analsys and tentativ fix below:
blktrace for before the commit:
259,012 0.02543 2394 G D 0 + 8388607 [mkfs.xfs]
259,013 0.08230 2394 I D 0 + 8388607 [mkfs.xfs]
259,014 0.31090 207
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:44:11AM -0700, Ming Lin wrote:
> I just did a quick test with a Samsung 900G NVMe device.
> mkfs.xfs is OK on 4.3-rc5.
>
> What's your device model? I may find a similar one to try.
This is a HGST Ultrastar SN100
Analsys and tentativ fix below:
blktrace for before the
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 4:50 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 12:07:15AM -0700, Ming Lin wrote:
>> From: Ming Lin
>>
>> The split code in blkdev_issue_{discard,write_same} can go away
>> now that any driver that cares does the split. We have to make
>> sure bio size doesn't
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 12:07:15AM -0700, Ming Lin wrote:
> From: Ming Lin
>
> The split code in blkdev_issue_{discard,write_same} can go away
> now that any driver that cares does the split. We have to make
> sure bio size doesn't overflow.
>
> For discard, we set max discard sectors to (1<<31)
From: Ming Lin
The split code in blkdev_issue_{discard,write_same} can go away
now that any driver that cares does the split. We have to make
sure bio size doesn't overflow.
For discard, we set max discard sectors to (1<<31)>>9 to ensure
it doesn't overflow bi_size and hopefully it is of the pro
19 matches
Mail list logo
