Re: [PATCH v20 01/12] block: Introduce queue limits and sysfs for copy-offload support
From: Nitesh Shetty <hidden>
Date: 2024-05-22 06:20:49
Also in:
dm-devel, linux-doc, linux-fsdevel, linux-nvme, lkml
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2024-06-05 · Re: [PATCH v20 01/12] block: Introduce queue limits and sysfs for copy-offload support · Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
- 2024-06-04 · Re: [PATCH v20 01/12] block: Introduce queue limits and sysfs for copy-offload support · Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
- 2024-06-04 · Re: [PATCH v20 01/12] block: Introduce queue limits and sysfs for copy-offload support · Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
On 20/05/24 04:33PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
On 2024/05/20 12:20, Nitesh Shetty wrote:quoted
@@ -231,10 +237,11 @@ int blk_set_default_limits(struct queue_limits *lim) { /* * Most defaults are set by capping the bounds in blk_validate_limits, - * but max_user_discard_sectors is special and needs an explicit - * initialization to the max value here. + * but max_user_discard_sectors and max_user_copy_sectors are special + * and needs an explicit initialization to the max value here.s/needs/need
acked
quoted
*/ lim->max_user_discard_sectors = UINT_MAX; + lim->max_user_copy_sectors = UINT_MAX; return blk_validate_limits(lim); }@@ -316,6 +323,25 @@ void blk_queue_max_discard_sectors(struct request_queue *q, } EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_queue_max_discard_sectors); +/* + * blk_queue_max_copy_hw_sectors - set max sectors for a single copy payload + * @q: the request queue for the device + * @max_copy_sectors: maximum number of sectors to copy + */ +void blk_queue_max_copy_hw_sectors(struct request_queue *q, + unsigned int max_copy_sectors) +{ + struct queue_limits *lim = &q->limits; + + if (max_copy_sectors > (BLK_COPY_MAX_BYTES >> SECTOR_SHIFT)) + max_copy_sectors = BLK_COPY_MAX_BYTES >> SECTOR_SHIFT; + + lim->max_copy_hw_sectors = max_copy_sectors; + lim->max_copy_sectors = + min(max_copy_sectors, lim->max_user_copy_sectors); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(blk_queue_max_copy_hw_sectors);Hmm... Such helper seems to not fit with Christoph's changes of the limits initialization as that is not necessarily done using &q->limits but depending on the driver, a different limit structure. So shouldn't this function be passed a queue_limits struct pointer instead of the request queue pointer ?
Acked, we made a mistake, we are no longer using this function after moving to atomic limits change. We will remove this function in next version.
quoted
+ /** * blk_queue_max_secure_erase_sectors - set max sectors for a secure erase * @q: the request queue for the device@@ -633,6 +659,10 @@ int blk_stack_limits(struct queue_limits *t, struct queue_limits *b, t->max_segment_size = min_not_zero(t->max_segment_size, b->max_segment_size); + t->max_copy_sectors = min(t->max_copy_sectors, b->max_copy_sectors); + t->max_copy_hw_sectors = min(t->max_copy_hw_sectors, + b->max_copy_hw_sectors); + t->misaligned |= b->misaligned; alignment = queue_limit_alignment_offset(b, start);diff --git a/block/blk-sysfs.c b/block/blk-sysfs.c index f0f9314ab65c..805c2b6b0393 100644 --- a/block/blk-sysfs.c +++ b/block/blk-sysfs.c@@ -205,6 +205,44 @@ static ssize_t queue_discard_zeroes_data_show(struct request_queue *q, char *pag return queue_var_show(0, page); } +static ssize_t queue_copy_hw_max_show(struct request_queue *q, char *page) +{ + return sprintf(page, "%llu\n", (unsigned long long) + q->limits.max_copy_hw_sectors << SECTOR_SHIFT); +} + +static ssize_t queue_copy_max_show(struct request_queue *q, char *page) +{ + return sprintf(page, "%llu\n", (unsigned long long) + q->limits.max_copy_sectors << SECTOR_SHIFT); +}Given that you repeat the same pattern twice, may be add a queue_var64_show() helper ? (naming can be changed).
Acked
quoted
+ +static ssize_t queue_copy_max_store(struct request_queue *q, const char *page, + size_t count) +{ + unsigned long max_copy_bytes; + struct queue_limits lim; + ssize_t ret; + int err; + + ret = queue_var_store(&max_copy_bytes, page, count); + if (ret < 0) + return ret; + + if (max_copy_bytes & (queue_logical_block_size(q) - 1)) + return -EINVAL; + + blk_mq_freeze_queue(q); + lim = queue_limits_start_update(q); + lim.max_user_copy_sectors = max_copy_bytes >> SECTOR_SHIFT;max_copy_bytes is an unsigned long, so 64 bits on 64-bit arch and max_user_copy_sectors is an unsigned int, so 32-bits. There are thus no guarantees that this will not overflow. A check is needed.
Acked
quoted
+ err = queue_limits_commit_update(q, &lim); + blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q); + + if (err)You can reuse ret here. No need for adding the err variable.
Acked
quoted
+ return err; + return count; +} + static ssize_t queue_write_same_max_show(struct request_queue *q, char *page) { return queue_var_show(0, page);@@ -505,6 +543,9 @@ QUEUE_RO_ENTRY(queue_nr_zones, "nr_zones"); QUEUE_RO_ENTRY(queue_max_open_zones, "max_open_zones"); QUEUE_RO_ENTRY(queue_max_active_zones, "max_active_zones"); +QUEUE_RO_ENTRY(queue_copy_hw_max, "copy_max_hw_bytes"); +QUEUE_RW_ENTRY(queue_copy_max, "copy_max_bytes"); + QUEUE_RW_ENTRY(queue_nomerges, "nomerges"); QUEUE_RW_ENTRY(queue_rq_affinity, "rq_affinity"); QUEUE_RW_ENTRY(queue_poll, "io_poll");@@ -618,6 +659,8 @@ static struct attribute *queue_attrs[] = { &queue_discard_max_entry.attr, &queue_discard_max_hw_entry.attr, &queue_discard_zeroes_data_entry.attr, + &queue_copy_hw_max_entry.attr, + &queue_copy_max_entry.attr, &queue_write_same_max_entry.attr, &queue_write_zeroes_max_entry.attr, &queue_zone_append_max_entry.attr,diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h index aefdda9f4ec7..109d9f905c3c 100644 --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h@@ -309,6 +309,10 @@ struct queue_limits { unsigned int discard_alignment; unsigned int zone_write_granularity; + unsigned int max_copy_hw_sectors; + unsigned int max_copy_sectors; + unsigned int max_user_copy_sectors; + unsigned short max_segments; unsigned short max_integrity_segments; unsigned short max_discard_segments;@@ -933,6 +937,8 @@ void blk_queue_max_secure_erase_sectors(struct request_queue *q, unsigned int max_sectors); extern void blk_queue_max_discard_sectors(struct request_queue *q, unsigned int max_discard_sectors); +extern void blk_queue_max_copy_hw_sectors(struct request_queue *q, + unsigned int max_copy_sectors); extern void blk_queue_max_write_zeroes_sectors(struct request_queue *q, unsigned int max_write_same_sectors); extern void blk_queue_logical_block_size(struct request_queue *, unsigned int);@@ -1271,6 +1277,14 @@ static inline unsigned int bdev_discard_granularity(struct block_device *bdev) return bdev_get_queue(bdev)->limits.discard_granularity; } +/* maximum copy offload length, this is set to 128MB based on current testing */Current testing will not be current in a while... So may be simply say "arbitrary" or something. Also please capitalize the first letter of the comment. So something like: /* Arbitrary absolute limit of 128 MB for copy offload. */quoted
+#define BLK_COPY_MAX_BYTES (1 << 27)Also, it is not clear from the name if this is a soft limit or a cap on the hardware limit... So at least please adjust the comment to say which one it is.
Acked, it is a soft limit. Thank You, Nitesh Shetty