On 5/19/22 09:59, Naohiro Aota wrote:
>> +
>>  static int sb_log_location(struct block_device *bdev, struct blk_zone 
>> *zones,
>> -                       int rw, u64 *bytenr_ret)
>> +                       int rw, int mirror, u64 *bytenr_ret)
>>  {
>>      u64 wp;
>>      int ret;
>> +    bool zones_empty = false;
>>  
>>      if (zones[0].type == BLK_ZONE_TYPE_CONVENTIONAL) {
>>              *bytenr_ret = zones[0].start << SECTOR_SHIFT;
>> @@ -775,13 +808,31 @@ static int sb_log_location(struct block_device *bdev, 
>> struct blk_zone *zones,
>>      if (ret != -ENOENT && ret < 0)
>>              return ret;
>>  
>> +    if (ret == -ENOENT)
>> +            zones_empty = true;
>> +
> 
> I think, we don't need this. We need to issue the zeroout when
> zones[0]->cond == BLK_ZONE_COND_EMPTY && !is_power_of_2(...) after sending
> ZONE_RESET if necessary. No?
> 
Yeah. I added this extra check to cover all the cases possible. But you
are right that it is enough to issue zeroout only for this condition:
zones[0]->cond == BLK_ZONE_COND_EMPTY && !is_power_of_2(...) as both the
zones empty is not likely to happen.
>>      if (rw == WRITE) {
>>              struct blk_zone *reset = NULL;
>> +            bool is_sb_offset_write_req = false;
>> +            u32 reset_zone_nr = -1;
>>  
>> -            if (wp == zones[0].start << SECTOR_SHIFT)
>> +            if (wp == zones[0].start << SECTOR_SHIFT) {
>>                      reset = &zones[0];
>> -            else if (wp == zones[1].start << SECTOR_SHIFT)
>> +                    reset_zone_nr = 0;

--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel

Reply via email to