[dm-devel] [PATCH v2] dm: Fix alignment stacking on partitioned devices

[Mike Snitzer]

On Tue, Jan 05 2010 at  9:57pm -0500,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 05 2010 at  9:23pm -0500,
> Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> > >>>>> "Alasdair" == Alasdair G Kergon <agk at redhat.com> writes:
> > 
> > Alasdair> extern int blk_stack_limits(struct queue_limits *t, struct
> > Alasdair> queue_limits *b,
> > Alasdair>                             sector_t offset);
> > 
> > Alasdair> This function is asking for the offset to be supplied as
> > Alasdair> sector_t i.e.  in units of sectors, but this patch uses bytes.
> > Alasdair> Please either change that to sectors as per the prototype, or
> > Alasdair> if it really does want bytes, fix the prototype to make that
> > Alasdair> clear.
> > 
> > It is sector_t because we don't have an existing type that fits the bill
> > (i.e. >= sector_t and dependent on whether LBD is on or not).  We're
> > trying to move away from counting in sectors because the notion is
> > confusing in the light of the logical vs. physical block size, device
> > alignment reporting, etc.
> > 
> > So maybe something like this?
> > 
> > 
> > block: Introduce blk_off_t
> > 
> > There are several places we want to communicate alignment and offsets in
> > bytes to avoid confusion with regards to underlying physical and logical
> > block sizes.  Introduce blk_off_t for block device byte offsets.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen at oracle.com>
> ...
> > diff --git a/include/linux/types.h b/include/linux/types.h
> > index c42724f..729f87a 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/types.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/types.h
> > @@ -134,9 +134,11 @@ typedef		__s64		int64_t;
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_LBDAF
> >  typedef u64 sector_t;
> >  typedef u64 blkcnt_t;
> > +typedef u64 blk_off_t;
> >  #else
> >  typedef unsigned long sector_t;
> >  typedef unsigned long blkcnt_t;
> > +typedef unsigned long blk_off_t;
> >  #endif
> >  
> >  /*
> 
> After looking closer there seems to be various type inconsistencies in
> the alignment_offset and discard_alignment related routines (returning
> 'int' in places, etc).
> 
> The following patch is what I found; I have no problem with switching
> from 'unsigned long' to blk_off_t for LBD though.
> 
> Martin, would like to carry forward with this?  Have I gone overboard
> with this patch?

I missed fixing disk_stack_limits()'s 'offset' though...

Mike