On 2017-03-31 21:57, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
On 31/03/17 05:51 PM, Sinan Kaya wrote:
You can put a restriction with DMI/SMBIOS such that all devices from
2016
work else they belong to blacklist.
How do you get a manufacturing date for a given device within the
kernel? Is this actually somethin
On 31/03/17 05:51 PM, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> You can put a restriction with DMI/SMBIOS such that all devices from 2016
> work else they belong to blacklist.
How do you get a manufacturing date for a given device within the
kernel? Is this actually something generically available?
Logan
On 3/31/2017 6:42 PM, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>
>
> On 31/03/17 03:38 PM, Sinan Kaya wrote:
>> On 3/31/2017 5:23 PM, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>>> What exactly would you white/black list? It can't be the NIC or the
>>> disk. If it's going to be a white/black list on the switch or root port
>>> then y
On 31/03/17 03:38 PM, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> On 3/31/2017 5:23 PM, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>> What exactly would you white/black list? It can't be the NIC or the
>> disk. If it's going to be a white/black list on the switch or root port
>> then you'd need essentially the same code to ensure they are
On 3/31/2017 5:23 PM, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
> What exactly would you white/black list? It can't be the NIC or the
> disk. If it's going to be a white/black list on the switch or root port
> then you'd need essentially the same code to ensure they are all behind
> the same switch or root port.
Wha
From: Sawan Chandak
Add fix to read correct register value for ISP82xx, during
check for register disconnect.ISP82xx has different base register.
Fixes: a465537ad1a4 ("qla2xxx: Disable the adapter and skip error recovery in
case of register disconnect")
Signed-off-by: Sawan Chandak
Signed-off-
From: Milan P Gandhi
Signed-off-by: Milan P Gandhi
Signed-off-by: Himanshu Madhani
---
drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_attr.c | 2 +-
drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_bsg.c | 2 +-
drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_gs.c | 2 +-
drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c | 2 +-
drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_isr.c | 6 +++---
5 f
Hi Martin,
Couple bug fixes for the scsi-fixes branch please apply to 4.11/scsi-fixes.
Thanks,
Himanshu
Milan P Gandhi (1):
qla2xxx: Fix typo in driver
Sawan Chandak (1):
qla2xxx: Add fix to read correct register value for ISP82xx.
drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_attr.c | 2 +-
drivers/scsi/ql
On 31/03/17 12:49 PM, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> Don't you need to clean up the p->pool here.
See Patch 7 in the series.
>> +put_device(&p->dev);
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(p2pmem_unregister);
>> +
>
> I don't like the ugliness around the switch port to be honest.
>
> Going to whitelist/blacklist
Hi Xiubo,
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:35AM, lixi...@cmss.chinamobile.com wrote:
> From: Xiubo Li
>
> For the bidirectional case, the Data-Out buffer blocks will always at
> the head of the tcmu_cmd's bitmap, and before gathering the Data-In
> buffer, first of all it should skip the Data-Out ones,
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 02:10:29PM -0400, Joe Korty wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 04:50:52PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> > Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> > A: Top-posting.
> > Q: What is the most annoying
Hi Logan,
> +/**
> + * p2pmem_unregister() - unregister a p2pmem device
> + * @p: the device to unregister
> + *
> + * The device will remain until all users are done with it
> + */
> +void p2pmem_unregister(struct p2pmem_dev *p)
> +{
> + if (!p)
> + return;
> +
> + dev_info(&p
ping
Le 19/03/2017 à 18:03, Romain Perier a écrit :
> The current PCI pool API are simple macro functions direct expanded to
> the appropriate dma pool functions. The prototypes are almost the same
> and semantically, they are very similar. I propose to use the DMA pool
> API directly and get rid
Hello,
Hopefully this is the right place for this, and apologies for the
lengthy mail. I'm struggling with an issue with SCSI UNMAP/discard in
newer kernels, and I'm hoping to find a resolution or at least to
better understand why this has changed.
Some background info:
Our Linux boxes are prima
We'll always use the WRITE ZEROES code for zeroing now.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
block/blk-lib.c | 4
1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-lib.c b/block/blk-lib.c
index e5b853f2b8a2..2a8d638544a7 100644
--- a/block/blk-lib.c
+++ b/block/blk-lib.c
@@ -364,10 +36
Fix up do_region to not allocate a bio_vec for discards. We've
got rid of the discard payload allocated by the caller years ago.
Obviously this wasn't actually harmful given how long it's been
there, but it's still good to avoid the pointless allocation.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
dr
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/scsi/sd.c | 31 ++-
drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c | 1 +
2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd.c b/drivers/scsi/sd.c
index b853f91fb3da..d8d9c0bdd93c 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/sd.c
+++
If this flag is set logical provisioning capable device should
release space for the zeroed blocks if possible, if it is not set
devices should keep the blocks anchored.
Also remove an out of sync kerneldoc comment for a static function
that would have become even more out of data with this change
But now for the real NVMe Write Zeroes yet, just to get rid of the
discard abuse for zeroing. Also rename the quirk flag to be a bit
more self-explanatory.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/nvme/host/core.c | 10 +-
drivers/nvme/host/nvme.h | 6 +++---
drivers/nvme/host/pci.
rbd only supports discarding on large alignments, so the zeroing code
would always fall back to explicit writings of zeroes.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/block/rbd.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/block/rbd.c b/drivers/block/rbd.c
index 517838b65964..0
This gets us support for non-discard efficient write of zeroes (e.g. NVMe)
and prepare for removing the discard_zeroes_data flag.
Also remove a pointless discard support check, which is done in
blkdev_issue_discard already.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
fs/block_dev.c | 10 ++
1
drbd always wants its discard wire operations to zero the blocks, so
use blkdev_issue_zeroout with the BLKDEV_ZERO_UNMAP flag instead of
reinventing it poorly.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_debugfs.c | 3 --
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_int.h | 6 ---
drivers/
mmc only supports discarding on large alignments, so the zeroing code
would always fall back to explicit writings of zeroes.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/mmc/core/queue.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/queue.c b/drivers/mmc/core/queue.c
inde
It's identical to discard as hole punches will always leave us with
zeroes on reads.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/block/loop.c | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
index 0ecb6461ed81..265cd2e33ff0 100644
--- a/drivers
Try to use a write same with unmap bit variant if the device supports it
and the caller allows for it.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/scsi/sd.c | 9 +
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd.c b/drivers/scsi/sd.c
index d8d9c0bdd93c..001593ed0444 100644
It seems like DRBD assumes its on the wire TRIM request always zeroes data.
Use that fact to implement REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_main.c | 3 ++-
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_nl.c | 2 ++
drivers/block/drbd/drbd_receiver.c | 6 +++---
d
Now that we use the proper REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES operation everywhere we can
kill this hack.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-block | 10 ++-
Documentation/block/queue-sysfs.txt | 5
block/blk-lib.c | 7 +
block/blk-setting
This avoids fallbacks to explicit zeroing in (__)blkdev_issue_zeroout if
the caller doesn't want them.
Also clean up the convoluted check for the return condition that this
new flag is added to.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
block/blk-lib.c| 5 -
include/linux/blkdev.h | 1 +
Now that we have REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES implemented for all devices that
support efficient zeroing of devices we can remove the call to
blkdev_issue_discard. This means we only have two ways of zeroing left
and can simply the code.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
block/blk-lib.c | 11 +---
Just the same as discard if the block size equals the system page size.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c | 13 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c b/drivers/block/zram/zram_drv.c
index dceb5ed
It's just a in-driver reimplementation of writing zeroes to the pages,
which fails if the discards aren't page aligned.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/block/brd.c | 54 -
1 file changed, 54 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/block
rsxx only supports discarding on large alignments, so the zeroing code
would always fall back to explicit writings of zeroes.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/block/rsxx/dev.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/block/rsxx/dev.c b/drivers/block/rsxx/dev.c
index
Copy & paste from the REQ_OP_WRITE_SAME code.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/md/linear.c| 1 +
drivers/md/md.h| 7 +++
drivers/md/multipath.c | 1 +
drivers/md/raid0.c | 2 ++
drivers/md/raid1.c | 4 +++-
drivers/md/raid10.c| 1 +
drivers/md/raid5.c
Turn the existin discard flag into a new BLKDEV_ZERO_UNMAP flag with
similar semantics, but without referring to diѕcard.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
block/blk-lib.c| 31 ++-
block/ioctl.c | 2 +-
drivers/block/drbd/d
Copy & paste from the REQ_OP_WRITE_SAME code.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
drivers/md/dm-core.h | 1 +
drivers/md/dm-io.c| 8 ++--
drivers/md/dm-linear.c| 1 +
drivers/md/dm-mpath.c | 1 +
drivers/md/dm-rq.c| 11 ---
driver
It seems like the code currently passes whatever it was using for writes
to WRITE SAME. Just switch it to WRITE ZEROES, although that doesn't
need any payload.
Untested, and confused by the code, maybe someone who understands it
better than me can help..
Not-yet-signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
Copy and past the REQ_OP_WRITE_SAME code to prepare to implementations
that limit the write zeroes size.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
block/blk-merge.c | 17 +++--
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
index 2afa2
This series makes REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES the only zeroing offload
supported by the block layer, and switches existing implementations
of REQ_OP_DISCARD that correctly set discard_zeroes_data to it,
removes incorrect discard_zeroes_data, and also switches WRITE SAME
based zeroing in SCSI to this new me
Split sd_setup_discard_cmnd into one function per provisioning type. While
this creates some very slight duplication of boilerplate code it keeps the
code modular for additions of new provisioning types, and for reusing the
write same functions for the upcoming scsi implementation of the Write Zer
Make life easy for implementations that needs to send a data buffer
to the device (e.g. SCSI) by numbering it as a data out command.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig
---
include/linux/blk_types.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/blk_types.h b/incl
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 12:04:55PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 2017年03月30日 22:32, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:00:08PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2017年03月30日 04:48, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > We are going to add more parameters to find_vqs, l
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 03:11:28PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-03-31 at 13:02 +0300, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> > Another good example may be a bug with dirty page cache after blkdiscard
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/22/789 . This simple bug result in crappy
> > fsimage if mkfs r
On 31/03/17 01:09 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> You're calling memcpy_{to,from}_iomem on non-__iomem pointers. This
> is a fundamental no-go as we keep I/O memory separate from kernel
> pointers.
Yes, that's true, however I don't know how we could get around that when
the iomem is referenced b
On Fri, 2017-03-31 at 13:02 +0300, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> Another good example may be a bug with dirty page cache after blkdiscard
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/22/789 . This simple bug result in crappy
> fsimage if mkfs relay on discard_zeroes_data behaviour.
> So IMHO basic blkdev test covera
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
A: No.
Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:1
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 09:50:30AM -0400, Joe Korty wrote:
> [PATCH] scsi: mpt3sas: fix hang on ata passthrough commands
>
> commit 16236802bfecb1082144a48b7d6fa60997824662 upstream
> commit ffb58456589443ca572221fabbdef3db8483a779 upstream
>
> Lockdep complains that the base level-only hctx->loc
Eryu Guan writes:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:43:19AM +0300, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
>> Christoph Hellwig writes:
>>
>> > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 05:19:01PM +0400, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
>> >> During LSFMM we have discussed how to test lower-backend of linux
>> >> IO-stack.
>> >> Common opinio
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:43:19AM +0300, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> Christoph Hellwig writes:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 05:19:01PM +0400, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> >> During LSFMM we have discussed how to test lower-backend of linux IO-stack.
> >> Common opinion was that xfstests is the most ob
Christoph Hellwig writes:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 05:19:01PM +0400, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
>> During LSFMM we have discussed how to test lower-backend of linux IO-stack.
>> Common opinion was that xfstests is the most obvious solution which cover
>> most of use cases filesystem care about.
>>
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:19:55PM -0400, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> > If you manually change the provisioning mode to WS10 on a device that
> > must use WRITE SAME (16) to be able to address all blocks you're already
> > screwed right now, and with this patch you can screw yourself through
> > th
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 07:15:50PM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> I got pretty far along with implementing the DM thinp support for
> WRITE_ZEROES in terms of thinp's DISCARD support (more of an
> implementation detail.. or so I thought).
>
> But while discussing this effort with Jeff Moyer he asked
You're calling memcpy_{to,from}_iomem on non-__iomem pointers. This
is a fundamental no-go as we keep I/O memory separate from kernel
pointers.
52 matches
Mail list logo
