[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190128080526.GA3874@lst.de>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 09:05:26 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
"Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, jfehlig@...e.com,
jon.grimm@....com, brijesh.singh@....com, jroedel@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] virtio-blk: Consider virtio_max_dma_size() for
maximum segment size
On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 10:51:51AM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 09:42:21AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Yes. But more importantly it would fix the limit for all other block
> > drivers that set large segment sizes when running over swiotlb.
>
> True, so it would be something like the diff below? I havn't worked on
> the block layer, so I don't know if that needs additional checks for
> ->dev or anything.
Looks sensible. Maybe for now we'll just do the virtio-blk case
that triggered it, and we'll do something like this patch for the
next merge window. We'll also need to apply the same magic to the
DMA boundary.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists