[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 08:24:41 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.ibm.com>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
Max Gurtovoy <maxg@...lanox.com>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
megaraidlinux.pdl@...adcom.com, MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@...adcom.com,
linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
usb-storage@...ts.one-eyed-alien.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/13] IB/iser: set virt_boundary_mask in the scsi host
On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 05:22:35PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 09:08:31PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > This ensures all proper DMA layer handling is taken care of by the
> > SCSI midlayer.
>
> Maybe not entirely related to this series, but it looks like the SCSI
> layer is changing the device global dma_set_max_seg_size() - at least
> in RDMA the dma device is being shared between many users, so we
> really don't want SCSI to make this value smaller.
>
> Can we do something about this?
We could do something about it as outlined in my mail - pass the
dma_params explicitly to the dma_map_sg call. But that isn't really
suitable for a short term fix and will take a little more time.
Until we've sorted that out the device paramter needs to be set to
the smallest value supported.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists