RE: [PATCH 10/13] megaraid_sas: set virt_boundary_mask in the scsi host

[Kashyap Desai]

>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 01:28:47AM +0530, Kashyap Desai wrote:
> > Is there any changes in API  blk_queue_virt_boundary? I could not find
> > relevant code which account for this. Can you help ?
> > Which git repo shall I use for testing ? That way I can confirm, I
> > didn't miss relevant changes.
>
> Latest mainline plus the series (which is about to get resent).
> blk_queue_virt_boundary now forced an unlimited max_hw_sectors as that
is
> how PRP-like schemes work, to work around a block driver merging bug.
But
> we also need to communicate that limit to the DMA layer so that we don't
set
> a smaller iommu segment size limitation.
>
> > >From your above explanation, it means (after this patch) max segment
> > >size
> > of the MR controller will be set to 4K.
> > Earlier it is possible to receive single SGE of 64K datalength (Since
> > max seg size was 64K), but now the same buffer will reach the driver
> > having 16 SGEs (Each SGE will contain 4K length).
>
> No, there is no more limit for the size of the segment at all, as for
PRPs each
> PRP is sort of a segment from the hardware perspective.
> We just require the segments to not have gaps, as PRPs don't allow for
that.
Thanks for clarification. I have also observed that max_segment_size Is
unchanged and it is 64K.
>
> That being said I think these patches are wrong for the case of megaraid
or
> mpt having both NVMe and SAS/ATA devices behind a single controller.
> Is that a valid configuration?
Yes. This is a valid configuration.