On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 04:42 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 06:25:25PM +0100, Joe Thornber wrote: > > tc->block_size is in sectors (you are passing sectors on the target > > line?). > > > > What's probably happening here is we should be doing: > > > > blk_limits_io_opt(limits, min(<some theoretical max>, tc->block_size << SECTOR_SHIFT)); > > Yes, that should do it. I don't even think we need the max, the optimum > I/O size is a 32-bit value and we'll reach the limit of the possible > block sizes much earlier. I'm tempted to just say min(16M, tc->block_size << SECTOR_SHIFT). Does this sound reasonable to you? -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
