From: Niklas Cassel <Niklas.Cassel@wdc.com>
To: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
Cc: "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] scsi: sd_zbc: Compare against block layer enum values
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2021 09:58:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YaIBOPmCC6QH2rei@x1-carbon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9172d395-29d0-6b1a-4be7-8968bfac6762@opensource.wdc.com>
On Sat, Nov 27, 2021 at 10:00:57AM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 2021/11/26 21:55, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> > From: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@wdc.com>
> >
> > sd_zbc_parse_report() fills in a struct blk_zone, which is the block layer
> > representation of a zone. This struct is also what will be copied to user
> > for a BLKREPORTZONE ioctl.
> >
> > Since sd_zbc_parse_report() compares against zone.type and zone.cond, which
> > are members of a struct blk_zone, the correct enum values to compare
> > against are the enum values defined by the block layer.
> >
> > These specific enum values for ZBC and the block layer happen to have the
> > same enum constants, but they could theoretically have been different.
> >
> > Compare against the block layer enum values, to make it more obvious that
> > struct blk_zone is the block layer representation of a zone, and not the
> > SCSI/ZBC representation of a zone.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@wdc.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c b/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c
> > index ed06798983f8..024f1bec6e5a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/sd_zbc.c
> > @@ -62,8 +62,8 @@ static int sd_zbc_parse_report(struct scsi_disk *sdkp, u8 *buf,
> > zone.capacity = zone.len;
> > zone.start = logical_to_sectors(sdp, get_unaligned_be64(&buf[16]));
> > zone.wp = logical_to_sectors(sdp, get_unaligned_be64(&buf[24]));
> > - if (zone.type != ZBC_ZONE_TYPE_CONV &&
> > - zone.cond == ZBC_ZONE_COND_FULL)
> > + if (zone.type != BLK_ZONE_TYPE_CONVENTIONAL &&
> > + zone.cond == BLK_ZONE_COND_FULL)
> > zone.wp = zone.start + zone.len;
>
> For the sake of avoiding layering violation, I would keep the code as is, unles
> Martin and James are OK with this ?
Sorry, but I don't understand this comment.
The whole point of sd_zbc_parse_report() is to take a ZBC zone representation,
stored in u8 *buf, and to convert it to a struct blk_zone used by the block
layer.
Similarly, nvme_zone_parse_entry() takes a ZNS zone representation, stored in a
struct nvme_zone_descriptor *entry, and to convert it to a struct blk_zone.
When comparing against struct members inside entry, the NVMe enums have to be
used, i.e. NVME_ZONE_TYPE_SEQWRITE_REQ.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/nvme/host/zns.c#n158
However, assigning, or comparing against struct members of struct blk_zone,
the blk layer enums have to be used, i.e. BLK_ZONE_TYPE_SEQWRITE_REQ:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/nvme/host/zns.c#n164
And why did you give me your Reviewed-by on the NVMe patch that uses the
blk later enums here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nvme/ef1c39ab-7b56-6a37-0f4f-1ca111d5b48b@opensource.wdc.com/T/#t
Be consistent, either ack both or nack both :)
>
> A more sensible patch may be to add a static checking that all BLK_ZONE_COND_*
> and BLK_ZONE_TYPE_* enum values are equal to the ZBC defined values in
> include/scsi/scsi_proto.h (ZBC_ZONE_COND_* and ZBC_ZONE_TYPE_* macros).
The blk-zoned block layer is obviously modeled after ZBC, that is why all the
enum constants happen to be the same. But this obviously doesn't have to be
true for all existing/future lower level interfaces which supports zones.
Kind regards,
Niklas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-27 10:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-26 12:55 [PATCH 1/2] scsi: sd_zbc: Compare against block layer enum values Niklas Cassel
2021-11-26 12:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] scsi: sd_zbc: Clean up sd_zbc_parse_report() setting of wp Niklas Cassel
2021-11-26 14:10 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2021-11-27 1:03 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-11-26 14:09 ` [PATCH 1/2] scsi: sd_zbc: Compare against block layer enum values Johannes Thumshirn
2021-11-27 1:00 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-11-27 9:58 ` Niklas Cassel [this message]
2021-11-29 7:35 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-11-29 13:15 ` Niklas Cassel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YaIBOPmCC6QH2rei@x1-carbon \
--to=niklas.cassel@wdc.com \
--cc=damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox