[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFx+gP1+ztJ+THoxLpXkpv83k9JRikG7nD7cY1xByOpCAw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 10:43:59 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
Stefan Haberland <sth@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: fix bio splitting on max sectors
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com> wrote:
>
> This patch fixes the issue by making the max io size aligned
> to logical block size.
Looks better, thanks.
I'd suggest also moving the "max_sectors" variable into the
bio_for_each_segment() loop too just to keep variables with minimal
scope, but at least this is fairly legible.
Also:
> +static inline unsigned get_max_io_size(struct request_queue *q,
> + struct bio *bio)
> +{
> + unsigned sectors = blk_max_size_offset(q, bio->bi_iter.bi_sector);
> + unsigned mask = ~(queue_logical_block_size(q) - 1);
> +
> + /* aligned to logical block size */
> + sectors = ((sectors << 9) & mask) >> 9;
this could be written as
unsigned mask = queue_logical_block_size(q) - 1;
sectors = sectors & ~(mask >> 9);
avoiding the extra shift. That also avoids the possible overflow that
that extra left-shift introduces. Hmm?
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists