Re: [PATCH v8 10/10] nvme: Atomic write support
Kanchan Joshi <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.kernel.aio.general,gmane.linux.block,gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.file-systems,gmane.linux.scsi,gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs,gmane.linux.kernel.io-uring |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 6/10/2024 4:13 PM, John Garry wrote:
> +static bool nvme_valid_atomic_write(struct request *req)
> +{
> + struct request_queue *q = req->q;
> + u32 boundary_bytes = queue_atomic_write_boundary_bytes(q);
> +
> + if (blk_rq_bytes(req) > queue_atomic_write_unit_max_bytes(q))
> + return false;
> +
> + if (boundary_bytes) {
> + u64 mask = boundary_bytes - 1, imask = ~mask;
> + u64 start = blk_rq_pos(req) << SECTOR_SHIFT;
> + u64 end = start + blk_rq_bytes(req) - 1;
> +
> + /* If greater then must be crossing a boundary */
> + if (blk_rq_bytes(req) > boundary_bytes)
> + return false;
Nit: I'd cache blk_rq_bytes(req), since that is repeating and this
function is called for each atomic IO.
> +
> + if ((start & imask) != (end & imask))
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> static inline blk_status_t nvme_setup_rw(struct nvme_ns *ns,
> struct request *req, struct nvme_command *cmnd,
> enum nvme_opcode op)
> @@ -941,6 +965,12 @@ static inline blk_status_t nvme_setup_rw(struct nvme_ns *ns,
>
> if (req->cmd_flags & REQ_RAHEAD)
> dsmgmt |= NVME_RW_DSM_FREQ_PREFETCH;
> + /*
> + * Ensure that nothing has been sent which cannot be executed
> + * atomically.
> + */
> + if (req->cmd_flags & REQ_ATOMIC && !nvme_valid_atomic_write(req))
> + return BLK_STS_INVAL;
>
Is this validity check specific to NVMe or should this be moved up to
block layer as it also knows the limits?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-aio' in
the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux AIO,
see: http://www.kvack.org/aio/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]">[email protected]</a>