On 5/21/24 07:25, Nitesh Shetty wrote:

On 20/05/24 03:42PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:

quoted

On 5/20/24 03:20, Nitesh Shetty wrote:

quoted

+    if (max_copy_bytes & (queue_logical_block_size(q) - 1))
+        return -EINVAL;

Wouldn't it be more user-friendly if this check would be left out? Does any code
depend on max_copy_bytes being a multiple of the logical block size?

In block layer, we use max_copy_bytes to split larger copy into
device supported copy size.
Simple copy spec requires length to be logical block size aligned.
Hence this check.

Will blkdev_copy_sanity_check() reject invalid copy requests even if this
check is left out?

Thanks,

Bart.