[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b3ce860d-4a1e-4980-97d9-0e8ad381c689@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 12:09:46 +0000
From: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
To: Nilay Shroff <nilay@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, brauner@...nel.org, bvanassche@....org,
dchinner@...hat.com, djwong@...nel.org, hch@....de, jack@...e.cz,
jbongio@...gle.com, jejb@...ux.ibm.com, kbusch@...nel.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
martin.petersen@...cle.com, ming.lei@...hat.com, ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com,
sagi@...mberg.me, tytso@....edu, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/15] block: Add checks to merging of atomic writes
On 12/02/2024 10:54, Nilay Shroff wrote:
>
> Shall we ensure here that we don't cross max limit of atomic write supported by
>
> device? It seems that if the boundary size is not advertized by the device
>
> (in fact, I have one NVMe drive which has boundary size zero i.e. nabo/nabspf/
>
> nawupf are all zero but awupf is non-zero) then we (unconditionally) allow
>
> merging.
BTW, if you don't mind, can you share awupf value and device model? I
have been on the search for NVMe devices which support atomic writes
(with non-zero PF reported value). All I have is a M.2 card which has a
4KB PF atomic write value.
But if this is private info, then ok.
Thanks,
John
Powered by blists - more mailing lists