[PATCH] zloop: print device that had errors

[PATCH] zloop: print device that had errors

[Johannes Thumshirn]

When testing zoned filesystems that span multiple zloop drives it can be
difficult to figure out which devices access caused an error.

Prefix the error messages where we have the disk available with the disk
name.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com>
---
 drivers/block/zloop.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------
 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/block/zloop.c b/drivers/block/zloop.c
index 8f485ef51557..9145e0f98d56 100644
--- a/drivers/block/zloop.c
+++ b/drivers/block/zloop.c
@@ -318,22 +318,23 @@ static int zloop_update_seq_zone(struct zloop_device *zlo, unsigned int zone_no)
 
 	ret = vfs_getattr(&zone->file->f_path, &stat, STATX_SIZE, 0);
 	if (ret < 0) {
-		pr_err("Failed to get zone %u file stat (err=%d)\n",
-		       zone_no, ret);
+		pr_err("%pg: Failed to get zone %u file stat (err=%d)\n",
+		       zlo->disk->part0, zone_no, ret);
 		set_bit(ZLOOP_ZONE_SEQ_ERROR, &zone->flags);
 		return ret;
 	}
 
 	file_sectors = stat.size >> SECTOR_SHIFT;
 	if (file_sectors > zlo->zone_capacity) {
-		pr_err("Zone %u file too large (%llu sectors > %llu)\n",
-		       zone_no, file_sectors, zlo->zone_capacity);
+		pr_err("%pg: Zone %u file too large (%llu sectors > %llu)\n",
+		       zlo->disk->part0, zone_no, file_sectors,
+		       zlo->zone_capacity);
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}
 
 	if (!IS_ALIGNED(stat.size, zlo->block_size)) {
-		pr_err("Zone %u file size (%llu) not aligned to block size %u\n",
-		       zone_no, stat.size, zlo->block_size);
+		pr_err("%pg: Zone %u file size (%llu) not aligned to block size %u\n",
+		       zlo->disk->part0, zone_no, stat.size, zlo->block_size);
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}
 
@@ -604,12 +605,14 @@ static int zloop_seq_write_prep(struct zloop_cmd *cmd)
 	} else {
 		if (cmd->sector != zone->wp) {
 			if (zone->wp == ULLONG_MAX)
-				pr_err("Zone %u: write to %s zone: sect %llu\n",
-				       zone_no, blk_zone_cond_str(zone->cond),
+				pr_err("%pg: Zone %u: write to %s zone: sect %llu\n",
+				       zlo->disk->part0, zone_no,
+				       blk_zone_cond_str(zone->cond),
 				       cmd->sector);
 			else
-				pr_err("Zone %u: unaligned write: sect %llu, wp %llu\n",
-				       zone_no, cmd->sector, zone->wp);
+				pr_err("%pg: Zone %u: unaligned write: sect %llu, wp %llu\n",
+				       zlo->disk->part0, zone_no, cmd->sector,
+				       zone->wp);
 			ret = -EIO;
 			goto out_unlock;
 		}
@@ -837,8 +840,9 @@ static void zloop_complete_rq(struct request *rq)
 	switch (req_op(rq)) {
 	case REQ_OP_READ:
 		if (cmd->ret < 0)
-			pr_err("Zone %u: failed read sector %llu, %llu sectors\n",
-			       zone_no, cmd->sector, cmd->nr_sectors);
+			pr_err("%pg: Zone %u: failed read sector %llu, %llu sectors\n",
+			       zlo->disk->part0, zone_no, cmd->sector,
+			       cmd->nr_sectors);
 
 		/* Short read. Zero out the unread tail beyond cmd->ret. */
 		if (cmd->ret >= 0 && cmd->ret != blk_rq_bytes(rq))
@@ -847,14 +851,15 @@ static void zloop_complete_rq(struct request *rq)
 	case REQ_OP_WRITE:
 	case REQ_OP_ZONE_APPEND:
 		if (cmd->ret < 0)
-			pr_err("Zone %u: failed %swrite sector %llu, %llu sectors\n",
-			       zone_no,
+			pr_err("%pg: Zone %u: failed %swrite sector %llu, %llu sectors\n",
+			       zlo->disk->part0, zone_no,
 			       req_op(rq) == REQ_OP_WRITE ? "" : "append ",
 			       cmd->sector, cmd->nr_sectors);
 
 		if (cmd->ret >= 0 && cmd->ret != blk_rq_bytes(rq)) {
-			pr_err("Zone %u: partial write %ld/%u B\n",
-			       zone_no, cmd->ret, blk_rq_bytes(rq));
+			pr_err("%pg: Zone %u: partial write %ld/%u B\n",
+			       zlo->disk->part0, zone_no, cmd->ret,
+			       blk_rq_bytes(rq));
 			cmd->ret = -EIO;
 		}
 
-- 
2.56.0

Re: [PATCH] zloop: print device that had errors

[Christoph Hellwig]

Looks good:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Re: [PATCH] zloop: print device that had errors

[Jens Axboe]

On 10/16/26 1:30 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> When testing zoned filesystems that span multiple zloop drives it can be
> difficult to figure out which devices access caused an error.
> 
> Prefix the error messages where we have the disk available with the disk
> name.

I don't know what this is against (doesn't say), and it doesn't apply to
the next branch...

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: [PATCH] zloop: print device that had errors

[Johannes Thumshirn]

On 16.10.26 16:23, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 10/16/26 1:30 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>> When testing zoned filesystems that span multiple zloop drives it can be
>> difficult to figure out which devices access caused an error.
>>
>> Prefix the error messages where we have the disk available with the disk
>> name.
> 
> I don't know what this is against (doesn't say), and it doesn't apply to
> the next branch...
> 

Strange, it applied on 34fbfb9d8d1f ("Merge branch 'for-7.4/block' into 
for-next") in your tree.

Re: [PATCH] zloop: print device that had errors

[Jens Axboe]

On 10/16/26 8:40 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> On 16.10.26 16:23, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 10/16/26 1:30 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>>> When testing zoned filesystems that span multiple zloop drives it can be
>>> difficult to figure out which devices access caused an error.
>>>
>>> Prefix the error messages where we have the disk available with the disk
>>> name.
>>
>> I don't know what this is against (doesn't say), and it doesn't apply to
>> the next branch...
>>
> 
> Strange, it applied on 34fbfb9d8d1f ("Merge branch 'for-7.4/block' into for-next") in your tree.

Does it apply to for-7.4/block? That's what I used. Doing other git work
right now and will re-check later.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: [PATCH] zloop: print device that had errors

[Johannes Thumshirn]

On 16.10.26 16:44, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 10/16/26 8:40 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>> On 16.10.26 16:23, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 10/16/26 1:30 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>>>> When testing zoned filesystems that span multiple zloop drives it can be
>>>> difficult to figure out which devices access caused an error.
>>>>
>>>> Prefix the error messages where we have the disk available with the disk
>>>> name.
>>>
>>> I don't know what this is against (doesn't say), and it doesn't apply to
>>> the next branch...
>>>
>>
>> Strange, it applied on 34fbfb9d8d1f ("Merge branch 'for-7.4/block' into for-next") in your tree.
> 
> Does it apply to for-7.4/block? That's what I used. Doing other git work
> right now and will re-check later.
> 

No only your for-next, sorry. I'll resend once I fixed my mail setup again