On Thu, Nov 27 2008, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Thursday 27 November 2008 04:12:25 Chris Wright wrote: > > * Rusty Russell (rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > > + /* No real sector limit. */ > > > + blk_queue_max_sectors(vblk->disk->queue, -1U); > > > + > > > > Is that actually legitimate? I think it'd still work out, but seems > > odd, e.g. all the spots that do: > > > > q->max_hw_sectors << 9 > > > > will just toss the upper bits... > > I think this just indicates that *my driver* doesn't have an issue > with large numbers of sectors. The block layer may well... We should probably just truncate insanely large values like -1 to something sane. For the above case we already do trunc it to 1MB, as it's the soft IO size. The segment size is already in bytes, so in fact everything already looks fine. -- Jens Axboe _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
