Re: [PATCH 1/2] target: Don't arbitrary limit I/O size to fabric_max_sectors

2015-01-09 Thread Nicholas A. Bellinger
On Fri, 2015-01-09 at 15:43 -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > > "nab" == Nicholas A Bellinger writes: > > nab> The concern is when older hardware drivers are reporting say > nab> queue_max_hw_sectors=128 with initiators are not actively honoring > nab> block limits EVPD MAXIMUM TRANSFER LENG

Re: [PATCH 1/2] target: Don't arbitrary limit I/O size to fabric_max_sectors

2015-01-09 Thread Martin K. Petersen
> "nab" == Nicholas A Bellinger writes: nab> The concern is when older hardware drivers are reporting say nab> queue_max_hw_sectors=128 with initiators are not actively honoring nab> block limits EVPD MAXIMUM TRANSFER LENGTH, that would result in nab> I/Os over 64K generating exception status

Re: [PATCH 1/2] target: Don't arbitrary limit I/O size to fabric_max_sectors

2015-01-09 Thread Nicholas A. Bellinger
On Thu, 2015-01-08 at 14:49 -0800, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > On Thu, 2015-01-08 at 09:37 -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > > > "nab" == Nicholas A Bellinger writes: > > > > nab> IIRC, most modern hardware is reporting a large enough value for > > nab> queue_max_hw_sectors() to support 8

Re: [PATCH 1/2] target: Don't arbitrary limit I/O size to fabric_max_sectors

2015-01-08 Thread Nicholas A. Bellinger
On Thu, 2015-01-08 at 09:37 -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote: > > "nab" == Nicholas A Bellinger writes: > > nab> IIRC, most modern hardware is reporting a large enough value for > nab> queue_max_hw_sectors() to support 8 MB I/Os, but I'm thinking that > nab> this could end up being problematic

Re: [PATCH 1/2] target: Don't arbitrary limit I/O size to fabric_max_sectors

2015-01-08 Thread Martin K. Petersen
> "nab" == Nicholas A Bellinger writes: nab> IIRC, most modern hardware is reporting a large enough value for nab> queue_max_hw_sectors() to support 8 MB I/Os, but I'm thinking that nab> this could end up being problematic for older hardware that is nab> reporting much smaller values. Report

Re[2]: [PATCH 1/2] target: Don't arbitrary limit I/O size to fabric_max_sectors

2015-01-07 Thread Lance Gropper
ot;target-devel" ; "linux-scsi" ; "Christoph Hellwig" ; "Roland Dreier" ; "Martin K. Petersen" Sent: 1/7/2015 8:11:47 AM Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] target: Don't arbitrary limit I/O size to fabric_max_sectors Hey Christoph, Adding CC' for M

Re: [PATCH 1/2] target: Don't arbitrary limit I/O size to fabric_max_sectors

2015-01-07 Thread Nicholas A. Bellinger
Hey Christoph, Adding CC' for MKP. On Wed, 2015-01-07 at 00:24 +, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > From: Nicholas Bellinger > > This patch avoids the arbitrary limiting of I/O size to fabric_max_sectors, > which currently has a hardcoded max of 8192 (4 MB for 512 byte sector > devices). > >

[PATCH 1/2] target: Don't arbitrary limit I/O size to fabric_max_sectors

2015-01-06 Thread Nicholas A. Bellinger
From: Nicholas Bellinger This patch avoids the arbitrary limiting of I/O size to fabric_max_sectors, which currently has a hardcoded max of 8192 (4 MB for 512 byte sector devices). This is problematic because Linux initiators have only recently started to honor block limits MAXIMUM TRANSFER LENG