[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20081027173739Q.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:37:47 +0900
From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
To: jeremy@...p.org
Cc: fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...e.hu, jens.axboe@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: replace BIO_VMERGE_BOUNDARY with
BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:21:41 +1100
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:
> FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> > The block layer always done the physical merge if possible. We don't
> > provide any kernel parameter to disable it.
> >
> > The iommu_bio_merge parameter had been used to enable the virtual
> > merge. As I wrote, the virtual merge feature was completely
> > removed. Effectively, the iommu_bio_merge parameter is meaningless
> > now.
> >
>
> Under Xen, pages which appear to be pseudo-physically adjacent are not
> necessarily really physically adjacent. We need to hook
> BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE to prevent the bio layer from inappropriately
> merging requests across non-contiguous page boundaries.
I'm not familiar with what Xen does but why can't Xen just override
BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE?
Why does Xen need to hook BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE to the iommu_bio_merge
parameter (as this patch does)? BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE and the
iommu_bio_merge parameter are not related at all.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists