Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 25 May 2022 17:07:08 +0200
From:   Thomas =?utf-8?Q?Wei=C3=9Fschuh?= <linux@weissschuh.net>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc:     Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-pci: fix host memory buffer allocation size
Message-ID: <b39c568b-338f-45bb-92f9-0175a909c3f8@t-8ch.de>
References: <20220428101922.14216-1-linux@weissschuh.net>
 <20220428143603.GA20460@lst.de>
 <5060d75e-46c0-4d29-a334-62c7e9714fa7@t-8ch.de>
 <20220428150644.GA22685@lst.de>
 <676c02ef-4bbc-43f3-b3e6-27a7d353f974@t-8ch.de>
 <20220510070356.GA11660@lst.de>
 <6123b484-bf2c-49f0-a657-6085c7333b2e@t-8ch.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <6123b484-bf2c-49f0-a657-6085c7333b2e@t-8ch.de>
Jabber-ID: thomas@t-8ch.de
Precedence: bulk

On 2022-05-10 12:20+0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> [..]
> > We could look into removing the min with
> > PAGE_SIZE * MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES to try to do larger segments for
> > "segment challenged" controllers now that it could work on a lot
> > of iommu enabled setups.  But I'd rather have a very good reason for
> > that.
> 
> On my current setup (WD SN770 on ThinkPad X1 Carbon Gen9) frequently the NVME
> controller stops responding. Switching from no scheduler to mq-deadline reduced
> this but did not eliminate it.
> Since switching to HMB of 1 * 200MiB and no scheduler this did not happen anymore.
> (But I'll need some more time to gain real confidence in this)

So this patch dramatically improves the stability of my disk.

Without it and queue/scheduler=none the controller stops responding after a few
minutes. mq-deadline reduced it to every few hours.

With the patch it happens roughly once a week.

I'll still RMA the disk and see if the replacement changes anything.

Maybe some of the Western Digital employees here could take a look or check if
there is a new firmware available.
(The official updater requires Windows and there is no external documentation
about the firmware)

Not sure if a change from very broken to only slightly broken would be enough
of a good reason to be honest.

Thomas