[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5656BF25.3000407@suse.de>
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 09:13:25 +0100
From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>
CC: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <Linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: QUEUE_FLAG_NO_SG_MERGE and non-block-mq
Hi all,
while investigating the crash in scsi_lib.c I found a rather curious
behaviour for QUEUE_FLAG_NO_SG_MERGE.
While the flag is evaluated in blk_recalc_rq_segments and
blk_recount_segments (resulting in nr_phys_segments being
computed based on that flag) it is completely ignored
during blk_rq_map_sg() or the actual merging itself.
This typically shouldn't be an issue, seeing that with
QUEUE_FLAG_NO_SG_MERGE nr_phys_segments will always be
larger than the actual segment count.
However, it still makes me wonder:
What is the point of having a QUEUE_FLAG_NO_SG_MERGE
which doesn't work as advertised?
Or, to be precise, which only works for blk-mq?
Should we make it work for non-block-mq, too?
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage
hare@...e.de +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
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