linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 01/17] block: make generic_make

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 25 Dec 2014 14:09:25 +0800
From:	Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
To:	Dongsu Park <dongsu.park@...fitbricks.com>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>,
	Ming Lin <mlin@...ggr.net>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
	Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>, dm-devel@...hat.com,
	drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	Geoff Levand <geoff@...radead.org>, Jim Paris <jim@...n.com>,
	Joshua Morris <josh.h.morris@...ibm.com>,
	Philip Kelleher <pjk1939@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
	Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
	Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
	Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/17] block: make generic_make_request handle
 arbitrarily sized bios

On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Dongsu Park
<dongsu.park@...fitbricks.com> wrote:
> From: Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>
>
> The way the block layer is currently written, it goes to great lengths
> to avoid having to split bios; upper layer code (such as bio_add_page())
> checks what the underlying device can handle and tries to always create
> bios that don't need to be split.
>
> But this approach becomes unwieldy and eventually breaks down with
> stacked devices and devices with dynamic limits, and it adds a lot of
> complexity. If the block layer could split bios as needed, we could
> eliminate a lot of complexity elsewhere - particularly in stacked
> drivers. Code that creates bios can then create whatever size bios are
> convenient, and more importantly stacked drivers don't have to deal with
> both their own bio size limitations and the limitations of the
> (potentially multiple) devices underneath them.  In the future this will
> let us delete merge_bvec_fn and a bunch of other code.

Looks it is a very good idea to split bio in block.

>
> We do this by adding calls to blk_queue_split() to the various
> make_request functions that need it - a few can already handle arbitrary

I am wondering why the bio isn't splitted just before q->make_request_fn
is called in generic_make_request()?  By this way, drivers won't need
to call blk_queue_split() at all.  Is it because performance reason? or
others?

> size bios. Note that we add the call _after_ any call to
> blk_queue_bounce(); this means that blk_queue_split() and
> blk_recalc_rq_segments() don't need to be concerned with bouncing
> affecting segment merging.
>
> Some make_request_fn() callbacks were simple enough to audit and verify
> they don't need blk_queue_split() calls. The skipped ones are:
>
>  * nfhd_make_request (arch/m68k/emu/nfblock.c)
>  * axon_ram_make_request (arch/powerpc/sysdev/axonram.c)
>  * simdisk_make_request (arch/xtensa/platforms/iss/simdisk.c)
>  * brd_make_request (ramdisk - drivers/block/brd.c)
>  * mtip_submit_request (drivers/block/mtip32xx/mtip32xx.c)
>  * loop_make_request
>  * null_queue_bio
>  * bcache's make_request fns

I guess the above drivers haven't max_sectors/max_segment
limit.

Thanks,
Ming Lei
--
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/