diff --git a/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_nl.c b/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_nl.c index 94ed2b3ea636..fbd92803dc1d 100644 --- a/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_nl.c +++ b/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_nl.c @@ -1216,11 +1216,6 @@ static unsigned int drbd_max_peer_bio_size(struct drbd_device *device) return DRBD_MAX_BIO_SIZE; } -static void blk_queue_discard_granularity(struct request_queue *q, unsigned int granularity) -{ - q->limits.discard_granularity = granularity; -} - static unsigned int drbd_max_discard_sectors(struct drbd_connection *connection) { /* when we introduced REQ_WRITE_SAME support, we also bumped @@ -1247,62 +1242,6 @@ static bool drbd_discard_supported(struct drbd_connection *connection, return true; } -static void decide_on_discard_support(struct drbd_device *device, - struct drbd_backing_dev *bdev) -{ - struct drbd_connection *connection = - first_peer_device(device)->connection; - struct request_queue *q = device->rq_queue; - unsigned int max_discard_sectors; - - if (!drbd_discard_supported(connection, bdev)) - goto not_supported; - - /* - * We don't care for the granularity, really. - * - * Stacking limits below should fix it for the local device. Whether or - * not it is a suitable granularity on the remote device is not our - * problem, really. If you care, you need to use devices with similar - * topology on all peers. - */ - blk_queue_discard_granularity(q, 512); - max_discard_sectors = drbd_max_discard_sectors(connection); - blk_queue_max_discard_sectors(q, max_discard_sectors); - return; - -not_supported: - blk_queue_discard_granularity(q, 0); - blk_queue_max_discard_sectors(q, 0); -} - -static void fixup_write_zeroes(struct drbd_device *device, struct request_queue *q) -{ - /* Fixup max_write_zeroes_sectors after blk_stack_limits(): - * if we can handle "zeroes" efficiently on the protocol, - * we want to do that, even if our backend does not announce - * max_write_zeroes_sectors itself. */ - struct drbd_connection *connection = first_peer_device(device)->connection; - /* If the peer announces WZEROES support, use it. Otherwise, rather - * send explicit zeroes than rely on some discard-zeroes-data magic. */ - if (connection->agreed_features & DRBD_FF_WZEROES) - q->limits.max_write_zeroes_sectors = DRBD_MAX_BBIO_SECTORS; - else - q->limits.max_write_zeroes_sectors = 0; -} - -static void fixup_discard_support(struct drbd_device *device, struct request_queue *q) -{ - unsigned int max_discard = device->rq_queue->limits.max_discard_sectors; - unsigned int discard_granularity = - device->rq_queue->limits.discard_granularity >> SECTOR_SHIFT; - - if (discard_granularity > max_discard) { - blk_queue_discard_granularity(q, 0); - blk_queue_max_discard_sectors(q, 0); - } -} - /* This is the workaround for "bio would need to, but cannot, be split" */ static unsigned int drbd_backing_dev_max_segments(struct drbd_device *device) { @@ -1320,8 +1259,11 @@ static unsigned int drbd_backing_dev_max_segments(struct drbd_device *device) void drbd_reconsider_queue_parameters(struct drbd_device *device, struct drbd_backing_dev *bdev, struct o_qlim *o) { + struct drbd_connection *connection = + first_peer_device(device)->connection; struct request_queue * const q = device->rq_queue; unsigned int now = queue_max_hw_sectors(q) << 9; + struct queue_limits lim; struct request_queue *b = NULL; unsigned int new; @@ -1348,24 +1290,55 @@ void drbd_reconsider_queue_parameters(struct drbd_device *device, drbd_info(device, "max BIO size = %u\n", new); } + lim = queue_limits_start_update(q); if (bdev) { - blk_set_stacking_limits(&q->limits); - blk_queue_max_segments(q, - drbd_backing_dev_max_segments(device)); + blk_set_stacking_limits(&lim); + lim.max_segments = drbd_backing_dev_max_segments(device); } else { - blk_queue_max_segments(q, BLK_MAX_SEGMENTS); + lim.max_segments = BLK_MAX_SEGMENTS; } - blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(q, new >> SECTOR_SHIFT); - blk_queue_segment_boundary(q, PAGE_SIZE - 1); - decide_on_discard_support(device, bdev); + lim.max_hw_sectors = new >> SECTOR_SHIFT; + lim.seg_boundary_mask = PAGE_SIZE - 1; - if (bdev) { - blk_stack_limits(&q->limits, &b->limits, 0); - disk_update_readahead(device->vdisk); + /* + * We don't care for the granularity, really. + * + * Stacking limits below should fix it for the local device. Whether or + * not it is a suitable granularity on the remote device is not our + * problem, really. If you care, you need to use devices with similar + * topology on all peers. + */ + if (drbd_discard_supported(connection, bdev)) { + lim.discard_granularity = 512; + lim.max_hw_discard_sectors = + drbd_max_discard_sectors(connection); + } else { + lim.discard_granularity = 0; + lim.max_hw_discard_sectors = 0; } - fixup_write_zeroes(device, q); - fixup_discard_support(device, q); + + if (bdev) + blk_stack_limits(&lim, &b->limits, 0); + + /* + * If we can handle "zeroes" efficiently on the protocol, we want to do + * that, even if our backend does not announce max_write_zeroes_sectors + * itself. + */ + if (connection->agreed_features & DRBD_FF_WZEROES) + lim.max_write_zeroes_sectors = DRBD_MAX_BBIO_SECTORS; + else + lim.max_write_zeroes_sectors = 0; + + if ((lim.discard_granularity >> SECTOR_SHIFT) > + lim.max_hw_discard_sectors) { + lim.discard_granularity = 0; + lim.max_hw_discard_sectors = 0; + } + + if (queue_limits_commit_update(q, &lim)) + drbd_err(device, "setting new queue limits failed\n"); } /* Starts the worker thread */