On 20/05/2022 08:27, Javier González wrote: > So you are suggesting adding support for !PO2 in the block layer and > then a dm to present the device as a PO2 to the FS? This at least > addresses the hole issue for raw zoned block devices, so it can be a > first step. > > This said, it seems to me that the changes to the FS are not being a > real issue. In fact, we are exposing some bugs while we generalize the > zone size support. > > Could you point out what the challenges in btrfs are in the current > patches, that it makes sense to add an extra dm layer? I personally don't like the padding we need to do for the super block. As I've pointed out to Pankaj already, I don't think it is 100% powerfail safe as of now. It could probably be made, but that would also involve changing non-zoned btrfs code which we try to avoid as much as we can. As Damien already said, we still have issues with the general zoned support in btrfs, just have a look at the list of open issues [1] we have. [1] https://github.com/naota/linux/issues/ -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
