Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757574AbYGTOwm (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Jul 2008 10:52:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753851AbYGTOwc (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Jul 2008 10:52:32 -0400 Received: from accolon.hansenpartnership.com ([76.243.235.52]:40277 "EHLO accolon.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753364AbYGTOwb (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Jul 2008 10:52:31 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: fix q->max_segment_size checking in blk_recalc_rq_segments about VMERGE From: James Bottomley To: David Miller Cc: mpatocka@redhat.com, fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp, jens.axboe@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20080719.210737.197246608.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20080719.002826.73806419.davem@davemloft.net> <1216520228.3376.33.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080719.210737.197246608.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 09:52:25 -0500 Message-Id: <1216565545.4199.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 (2.22.3.1-1.fc9) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1486 Lines: 36 On Sat, 2008-07-19 at 21:07 -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: James Bottomley > Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 21:17:08 -0500 > > > Try this patch > > I'd rather remove the vmerge code, it doesn't buy us > anything, and for something so complex and so hard to > keep working correctly it's existence is far from > justified these days. You can ... as soon as BIO_VMERGE_BOUNDARY is undefined or set to zero, it gets compiled out of the block code. Since we're using it successfully in parisc, I don't want the block code removed, but I don't see a reason to force other architectures to use it. However, it has two use cases. One is the legacy one of making rather dumb I/O cards perform better (which is the primary on on parisc), but there is a current one making huge transfers go through SCSI using using the sg_table code. That latter is pretty vital to me since I have to keep the code working, but I don't really have any SCSI cards that can take advantage of it without virtual merging. As a slight irony, IBM is trying to persuade me that a ppc would be better than a parisc for big endian I/O testing ... so I might just be seeing if I can make virtual merging work on power too. James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/