-
Chaitanya Kulkarni authored
When handling rw commands, for inline bio case we only consider transfer size. This works well when req->sg_cnt fits into the req->inline_bvec, but it will result in the warning in __bio_add_page() when req->sg_cnt > NVMET_MAX_INLINE_BVEC. Consider an I/O size 32768 and first page is not aligned to the page boundary, then I/O is split in following manner :- [ 2206.256140] nvmet: sg->length 3440 sg->offset 656 [ 2206.256144] nvmet: sg->length 4096 sg->offset 0 [ 2206.256148] nvmet: sg->length 4096 sg->offset 0 [ 2206.256152] nvmet: sg->length 4096 sg->offset 0 [ 2206.256155] nvmet: sg->length 4096 sg->offset 0 [ 2206.256159] nvmet: sg->length 4096 sg->offset 0 [ 2206.256163] nvmet: sg->length 4096 sg->offset 0 [ 2206.256166] nvmet: sg->length 4096 sg->offset 0 [ 2206.256170] nvmet: sg->length 656 sg->offset 0 Now the req->transfer_size == NVMET_MAX_INLINE_DATA_LEN i.e. 32768, but the req->sg_cnt is (9) > NVMET_MAX_INLINE_BIOVEC which is (8). This will result in the following warning message :- nvmet_bdev_execute_rw() bio_add_page() __bio_add_page() WARN_ON_ONCE(bio_full(bio, len)); This scenario is very hard to reproduce on the nvme-loop transport only with rw commands issued with the passthru IOCTL interface from the host application and the data buffer is allocated with the malloc() and not the posix_memalign(). Fixes: 73383adf ("nvmet: don't split large I/Os unconditionally") Signed-off-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanya.kulkarni@wdc.com> Reviewed-by: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
608a9690