diff options
author | Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> | 2014-11-20 18:07:43 -0500 |
---|---|---|
committer | Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> | 2014-11-21 12:54:23 -0500 |
commit | d200c30ef00dd03aec6f1aeaac1546c6e515cbc0 (patch) | |
tree | d88a4b7b8f924a81266307d4c1df6c07f18bc583 /drivers/md/dm-thin.c | |
parent | 583024d248f486e21479d1912aa2093565455770 (diff) | |
download | linux-d200c30ef00dd03aec6f1aeaac1546c6e515cbc0.tar.bz2 |
dm thin: fix pool_io_hints to avoid looking at max_hw_sectors
Simplify the pool_io_hints code that works to establish a max_sectors
value that is a power-of-2 factor of the thin-pool's blocksize. The
biggest associated improvement is that the DM thin-pool is no longer
concerning itself with the data device's max_hw_sectors when adjusting
max_sectors.
This fixes the relative fragility of the original "dm thin: adjust
max_sectors_kb based on thinp blocksize" commit that only became
apparent when testing was performed using a DM thin-pool ontop of a
virtio_blk device. One proposed upstream patch detailed the problems
inherent in virtio_blk: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/20/611
So even though virtio_blk incorrectly set its max_hw_sectors it actually
helped make it clear that we need DM thinp to be tolerant of any future
Linux driver that incorrectly sets max_hw_sectors.
We only need to be concerned with modifying the thin-pool device's
max_sectors limit if it is smaller than the thin-pool's blocksize. In
this case the value of max_sectors does become a limiting factor when
upper layers (e.g. filesystems) construct their bios. But if the
hardware can support IOs larger than the thin-pool's blocksize the user
is encouraged to adjust the thin-pool's data device's max_sectors
accordingly -- doing so will enable the thin-pool to inherit the
established user-defined max_sectors.
Signed-off-by: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'drivers/md/dm-thin.c')
-rw-r--r-- | drivers/md/dm-thin.c | 21 |
1 files changed, 7 insertions, 14 deletions
diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-thin.c b/drivers/md/dm-thin.c index e9e9584fe769..8735543eacdb 100644 --- a/drivers/md/dm-thin.c +++ b/drivers/md/dm-thin.c @@ -3587,27 +3587,20 @@ static void pool_io_hints(struct dm_target *ti, struct queue_limits *limits) sector_t io_opt_sectors = limits->io_opt >> SECTOR_SHIFT; /* - * Adjust max_sectors_kb to highest possible power-of-2 - * factor of pool->sectors_per_block. + * If max_sectors is smaller than pool->sectors_per_block adjust it + * to the highest possible power-of-2 factor of pool->sectors_per_block. + * This is especially beneficial when the pool's data device is a RAID + * device that has a full stripe width that matches pool->sectors_per_block + * -- because even though partial RAID stripe-sized IOs will be issued to a + * single RAID stripe; when aggregated they will end on a full RAID stripe + * boundary.. which avoids additional partial RAID stripe writes cascading */ - if (limits->max_hw_sectors & (limits->max_hw_sectors - 1)) - limits->max_sectors = rounddown_pow_of_two(limits->max_hw_sectors); - else - limits->max_sectors = limits->max_hw_sectors; - if (limits->max_sectors < pool->sectors_per_block) { while (!is_factor(pool->sectors_per_block, limits->max_sectors)) { if ((limits->max_sectors & (limits->max_sectors - 1)) == 0) limits->max_sectors--; limits->max_sectors = rounddown_pow_of_two(limits->max_sectors); } - } else if (block_size_is_power_of_two(pool)) { - /* max_sectors_kb is >= power-of-2 thinp blocksize */ - while (!is_factor(limits->max_sectors, pool->sectors_per_block)) { - if ((limits->max_sectors & (limits->max_sectors - 1)) == 0) - limits->max_sectors--; - limits->max_sectors = rounddown_pow_of_two(limits->max_sectors); - } } /* |