On Mon, Oct 26 2020 at 7:48pm -0400, Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org wrote:
From: Mike Snitzer snitzer@redhat.com
[ Upstream commit 5091cdec56faeaefa79de4b6cb3c3c55e50d1ac3 ]
Using blk_max_size_offset() enables DM core's splitting to impose ti->max_io_len (via q->limits.chunk_sectors) and also fallback to respecting q->limits.max_sectors if chunk_sectors isn't set.
Signed-off-by: Mike Snitzer snitzer@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org
Not sure why this commit elevated to stable@ picking it up, please explain.
But you cannot take this commit standalone. These commits are prereqs:
22ada802ede8 block: use lcm_not_zero() when stacking chunk_sectors 07d098e6bbad block: allow 'chunk_sectors' to be non-power-of-2 882ec4e609c1 dm table: stack 'chunk_sectors' limit to account for target-specific splitting
This goes for all stable@ trees you AUTOSEL'd commit 5091cdec56f for.
Mike
drivers/md/dm.c | 20 ++++++++------------ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/md/dm.c b/drivers/md/dm.c index 6ed05ca65a0f8..3982012b1309c 100644 --- a/drivers/md/dm.c +++ b/drivers/md/dm.c @@ -1051,22 +1051,18 @@ static sector_t max_io_len_target_boundary(sector_t sector, struct dm_target *ti static sector_t max_io_len(sector_t sector, struct dm_target *ti) { sector_t len = max_io_len_target_boundary(sector, ti);
- sector_t offset, max_len;
- sector_t max_len;
/* * Does the target need to split even further?
* - q->limits.chunk_sectors reflects ti->max_io_len so* blk_max_size_offset() provides required splitting.* - blk_max_size_offset() also respects q->limits.max_sectors
- if (ti->max_io_len) {
offset = dm_target_offset(ti, sector);if (unlikely(ti->max_io_len & (ti->max_io_len - 1)))max_len = sector_div(offset, ti->max_io_len);elsemax_len = offset & (ti->max_io_len - 1);max_len = ti->max_io_len - max_len;if (len > max_len)len = max_len;- }
- max_len = blk_max_size_offset(dm_table_get_md(ti->table)->queue,
dm_target_offset(ti, sector));- if (len > max_len)
len = max_len;return len; } -- 2.25.1