From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>, Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com>,
Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Linux Block Layer Mailinglist <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailinglist <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: bios with an offset are always gappy
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 18:02:21 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170413100110.GB5964@ming.t460p> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170413080629.7610-1-jthumshirn@suse.de>
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 10:06:29AM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> Doing a mkfs.btrfs on a (qemu emulated) PCIe NVMe causes a kernel panic
> in nvme_setup_prps() because the dma_len will drop below zero but the
> length not.
Looks I can't reproduce the issue in QEMU(32G nvme, either partitioned
or not, just use 'mkfs.btrfs /dev/nvme0n1p1'), could you share the exact
mkfs command line and size of your emulated NVMe?
>
> A git bisect tracked the behaviour down to commit 729204ef49ec ("block:
> relax check on sg gap"). Since commit 729204ef49ec a bio's offsets are not
> taken into account in the decision if the bio will gap any more. Restore
> the old behavior of checking bio offsets as well for the decision if a
> bio will gap.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>
> Fixes: 729204ef49ec ("block: relax check on sg gap")
> Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
> ---
> include/linux/blkdev.h | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> index 7548f332121a..a03b7196209e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
> +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> @@ -1677,11 +1677,14 @@ static inline bool bio_will_gap(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *prev,
> {
> if (bio_has_data(prev) && queue_virt_boundary(q)) {
> struct bio_vec pb, nb;
> + bool offset;
>
> bio_get_last_bvec(prev, &pb);
> bio_get_first_bvec(next, &nb);
>
> - if (!bios_segs_mergeable(q, prev, &pb, &nb))
> + offset = pb.bv_offset || nb.bv_offset;
We don't consider pb's offset here, because if pb.bv_offset
isn't zero, pb should be the only bvec in 'prev' and will be
put in a standalone segement, and we still can make 'nb' into
this segment if both are mergeable.
But the following issue might be caused by commit 729204ef49ec
("block: relax check on sg gap"):
- if the 'next' has more than one segment
- the segment merged from 'pb' and the 1st segment of 'next'
may end at un-aligned virt boundary
Could you try the following patch to see if it fixes your issue?
---
diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
index 7548f332121a..65d1510681c6 100644
--- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
+++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
@@ -1659,16 +1659,28 @@ static inline bool bvec_gap_to_prev(struct request_queue *q,
* and the 1st bvec in the 2nd bio can be handled in one segment.
*/
static inline bool bios_segs_mergeable(struct request_queue *q,
- struct bio *prev, struct bio_vec *prev_last_bv,
+ struct bio *prev, struct bio *next,
+ struct bio_vec *prev_last_bv,
struct bio_vec *next_first_bv)
{
if (!BIOVEC_PHYS_MERGEABLE(prev_last_bv, next_first_bv))
return false;
if (!BIOVEC_SEG_BOUNDARY(q, prev_last_bv, next_first_bv))
return false;
- if (prev->bi_seg_back_size + next_first_bv->bv_len >
+ if (prev->bi_seg_back_size + next->bi_seg_front_size >
queue_max_segment_size(q))
return false;
+
+ /*
+ * if 'next' has multiple segments, we need to make
+ * sure the merged segment from 'pb' and the 1st segment
+ * of 'next' ends at aligned virt boundary.
+ */
+ if ((next->bi_seg_front_size < next->bi_iter.bi_size) &&
+ ((prev_last_bv->bv_offset + prev_last_bv->bv_len +
+ next->bi_seg_front_size) & queue_virt_boundary(q)))
+ return false;
+
return true;
}
@@ -1681,7 +1693,7 @@ static inline bool bio_will_gap(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *prev,
bio_get_last_bvec(prev, &pb);
bio_get_first_bvec(next, &nb);
- if (!bios_segs_mergeable(q, prev, &pb, &nb))
+ if (!bios_segs_mergeable(q, prev, next, &pb, &nb))
return __bvec_gap_to_prev(q, &pb, nb.bv_offset);
}
--
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-13 10:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-13 8:06 Johannes Thumshirn
2017-04-13 9:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-04-13 9:56 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2017-04-13 10:01 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2017-04-13 10:02 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2017-04-13 10:10 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2017-04-13 11:53 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2017-04-13 12:11 ` Ming Lei
[not found] ` <20170413122010.GJ6734@linux-x5ow.site>
2017-04-13 13:44 ` Ming Lei
2017-04-13 14:45 ` Ming Lei
2017-04-13 14:50 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2017-04-13 20:35 ` Andreas Mohr
2017-04-14 1:15 ` Ming Lei
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170413100110.GB5964@ming.t460p \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=osandov@osandov.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®