Commit 0f640dca authored by Mike Snitzer's avatar Mike Snitzer Committed by Alasdair G Kergon

dm thin: fix queue limits stacking

thin_io_hints() is blindly copying the queue limits from the thin-pool
which can lead to incorrect limits being set.  The fix here simply
deletes the thin_io_hints() hook which leaves the existing stacking
infrastructure to set the limits correctly.

When a thin-pool uses an MD device for the data device a thin device
from the thin-pool must respect MD's constraints about disallowing a bio
from spanning multiple chunks.  Otherwise we can see problems.  If the raid0
chunksize is 1152K and thin-pool chunksize is 256K I see the following
md/raid0 error (with extra debug tracing added to thin_endio) when
mkfs.xfs is executed against the thin device:

md/raid0:md99: make_request bug: can't convert block across chunks or bigger than 1152k 6688 127
device-mapper: thin: bio sector=2080 err=-5 bi_size=130560 bi_rw=17 bi_vcnt=32 bi_idx=0

This extra DM debugging shows that the failing bio is spanning across
the first and second logical 1152K chunk (sector 2080 + 255 takes the
bio beyond the first chunk's boundary of sector 2304).  So the bio
splitting that DM is doing clearly isn't respecting the MD limits.

max_hw_sectors_kb is 127 for both the thin-pool and thin device
(queue_max_hw_sectors returns 255 so we'll excuse sysfs's lack of
precision).  So this explains why bi_size is 130560.

But the thin device's max_hw_sectors_kb should be 4 (PAGE_SIZE) given
that it doesn't have a .merge function (for bio_add_page to consult
indirectly via dm_merge_bvec) yet the thin-pool does sit above an MD
device that has a compulsory merge_bvec_fn.  This scenario is exactly
why DM must resort to sending single PAGE_SIZE bios to the underlying
layer. Some additional context for this is available in the header for
commit 8cbeb67a ("dm: avoid unsupported spanning of md stripe boundaries").

Long story short, the reason a thin device doesn't properly get
configured to have a max_hw_sectors_kb of 4 (PAGE_SIZE) is that
thin_io_hints() is blindly copying the queue limits from the thin-pool
device directly to the thin device's queue limits.

Fix this by eliminating thin_io_hints.  Doing so is safe because the
block layer's queue limits stacking already enables the upper level thin
device to inherit the thin-pool device's discard and minimum_io_size and
optimal_io_size limits that get set in pool_io_hints.  But avoiding the
queue limits copy allows the thin and thin-pool limits to be different
where it is important, namely max_hw_sectors_kb.
Reported-by: default avatarDaniel Browning <>
Signed-off-by: default avatarMike Snitzer <>
Signed-off-by: default avatarAlasdair G Kergon <>
parent 949db153
......@@ -2746,19 +2746,9 @@ static int thin_iterate_devices(struct dm_target *ti,
return 0;
* A thin device always inherits its queue limits from its pool.
static void thin_io_hints(struct dm_target *ti, struct queue_limits *limits)
struct thin_c *tc = ti->private;
*limits = bdev_get_queue(tc->pool_dev->bdev)->limits;
static struct target_type thin_target = {
.name = "thin",
.version = {1, 6, 0},
.version = {1, 7, 0},
.module = THIS_MODULE,
.ctr = thin_ctr,
.dtr = thin_dtr,
......@@ -2767,7 +2757,6 @@ static struct target_type thin_target = {
.postsuspend = thin_postsuspend,
.status = thin_status,
.iterate_devices = thin_iterate_devices,
.io_hints = thin_io_hints,
Markdown is supported
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment