On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 07:53:20AM +0200, hch@xxxxxx wrote: > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 02:41:35PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > With the following debug patch. Based on that I think I'll just > > > formally submit the vmalloc switch as we're at -rc5, and then we > > > can restart the unaligned slub allocation drama.. > > > > This still doesn't make sense to me, because the pmem and brd code > > have no aligment limitations in their make_request code - they can > > handle byte adressing and should not have any problem at all with > > 8 byte aligned memory in bios. > > > > Digging a little furhter, I note that both brd and pmem use > > identical mechanisms to marshall data in and out of bios, so they > > are likely to have the same issue. > > > > So, brd_make_request() does: > > > > bio_for_each_segment(bvec, bio, iter) { > > unsigned int len = bvec.bv_len; > > int err; > > > > err = brd_do_bvec(brd, bvec.bv_page, len, bvec.bv_offset, > > bio_op(bio), sector); > > if (err) > > goto io_error; > > sector += len >> SECTOR_SHIFT; > > } > > > > So, the code behind bio_for_each_segment() splits multi-page bvecs > > into individual pages, which are passed to brd_do_bvec(). An > > unaligned 4kB io traces out as: > > > > [ 121.295550] p,o,l,s 00000000a77f0146,768,3328,0x7d0048 > > [ 121.297635] p,o,l,s 000000006ceca91e,0,768,0x7d004e > > > > i.e. page offset len sector > > 00000000a77f0146 768 3328 0x7d0048 > > 000000006ceca91e 0 768 0x7d004e > > > > You should be able to guess what the problems are from this. The problem should be that offset of '768' is passed to bio_add_page(). It should be one slub buffer used for block IO, looks an old unsolved problem. > > > > Both pmem and brd are _sector_ based. We've done a partial sector > > copy on the first bvec, then the second bvec has started the copy > > from the wrong offset into the sector we've done a partial copy > > from. > > > > IOWs, no error is reported when the bvec buffer isn't sector > > aligned, no error is reported when the length of data to copy was > > not a multiple of sector size, and no error was reported when we > > copied the same partial sector twice. > > Yes. I think bio_for_each_segment is buggy here, as it should not > blindly split by pages. bio_for_each_segment() just keeps the original interface as before introducing multi-page bvec. Thanks, Ming