On 2020/04/10 2:14, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 01:58:13AM +0000, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> On 2020/04/09 7:16, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>>> Sequential write with max_open_zones=1 has interesting (read: buggy)
>>> interaction with verify=.
>
>>> + if (f->zbd_info->open_zones[i] == nz) {
>>> + zbd_close_zone(td, f, i);
>>> + }
>>
>> nit: you do not need the {} brackets for the if here.
>
> I started to use {} everywhere, it is less thinking that way.
Sure, but that is not the coding style normally used in fio and many other open
source C projects. I will let Jens decide here.
>
>> With the nits above fixed, this looks OK to me.
>>
>> It would be good to add a test case for this to t/zbd/test-zbd-support. Can you
>> send something please ?
>
> I'll try. This needs a test with blktrace parsing and eveything.
That sounds like an overkill. Can't we use the debug output (debug=zbd) for
checking ? If that does not work, let's not add a test that complicates the test
setup.
--
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research
