Re: [PATCH v2] null_blk: add support for max open/active zone limit for zoned devices

[Klaus Jensen <its@irrelevant.dk>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2271 bytes --]

On Aug 28 07:36, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 2020/08/28 16:23, Klaus Jensen wrote:
> > On Aug 28 07:06, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> >> On 2020/08/27 22:50, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> >>> +static blk_status_t null_finish_zone(struct nullb_device *dev, struct blk_zone *zone)
> >>> +{
> >>> +	if (zone->type == BLK_ZONE_TYPE_CONVENTIONAL)
> >>> +		return BLK_STS_IOERR;
> >>> +
> >>> +	switch (zone->cond) {
> >>> +	case BLK_ZONE_COND_FULL:
> >>> +		/* finish operation on full is not an error */
> >>> +		return BLK_STS_OK;
> >>> +	case BLK_ZONE_COND_EMPTY:
> >>> +		if (!null_manage_zone_resources(dev, zone))
> >>
> >> OK. So you are hitting a fuzzy case here that is not actually well described in
> >> the standards. That is, does finishing an empty zone necessarilly imply a
> >> temporary transition through imp open ? Which you are assuming is a yes here.
> >> Personally, I would say that is not necessary, but no strong feeling either way.
> >>
> > 
> > For ZNS, the spec is pretty clear that ZSE to ZSF is a legal direct
> > transition. So I don't think the transition should be allowed to fail
> > due to a lack of resources.
> 
> I had a doubt and checked again ZBC & ZAC. I section 4.4.3.2.4 it says:
> 
> The Zone Condition state machine (see 4.4.3.5) requires the specified zone to
> have a Zone Condition of EXPLICITLY OPENED or IMPLICITLY OPENED before a finish
> zone operation is performed. If a zone with a Zone Condition of EMPTY or CLOSED
> is specified for a finish zone operation, prior to processing the finish zone
> operation, then the Zone Condition state machine requires that:
> a) a manage open zone resources operation (see 4.4.3.2.6) be performed; and
> b) the Zone Condition becomes IMPLICITLY OPENED.
> 
> And section 5.3 describing the zone finish command points to this section.
> So this is not the same as ZNS.
> 
> As Niklas mentioned, nullblk tends to follow more ZBC than ZNS, so the code is
> correct in this respect. We could also lean toward ZNS on this one. I personally
>  have no strong opinion either way since there is not real good reasons for
> finishing an empty zone that I can think of.
> 
> 

Alrighty then; thanks for looking it up! I won't fight for the ZNS
behavior then :)

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]