Regarding AHCI_MAX_SG and (ATA_HORKAGE_MAX_SEC_1024)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



So the (not so) recent bump of BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS from 1024 to 2560
(commit d2be537c3ba3) seemed to have caused trouble to some of the ATA
devices, which were then worked around with ATA_HORKAGE_MAX_SEC_1024.

However, I am suspecting that the bump of BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS is not
the "real" cause of the trouble, but the fact that AHCI_MAX_SG has
been set to a weird value of 168 (with a comment "hardware max is
64K", which neither seem to make any sense).

AHCI_MAX_SG is used to set the sg_tablesize (i.e. max_segments,
apparently), which is apparently used to derive the actual "request
size" (that is, if it is lower than max_sectors(_kb), it will be the
limiting factor instead).

For example, no matter if the drive has max_sectors set to 2560, or to
65535 (by adding it as the Optimal Transfer Length to libata's SATL,
which is also max_hw_sectors that is set from ATA_MAX_SECTORS_LBA48),
"avgrq-sz" in `iostat` will be capped at 1344 (168 * 8).

However, if I change AHCI_MAX_SG to 128 (which is also the
sg_tablesize set in libata.h from LIBATA_MAX_PRD), "avgrq-sz" in
`iostat` will be capped at 1024 (128 * 8), which should make
ATA_HORKAGE_MAX_SEC_1024 unnecessary.

So why has AHCI_MAX_SG been set to 168 anyway?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux