On 1/8/25 6:08 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: >> A kernel-based implementation is simpler and the configuration >> interface literally needs only a single echo bash command to add or >> remove devices. This allows minimal VM configurations with no >> dependencies on user tools/libraries to run these zoned devices, which >> is what we wanted. >> >> I completely agree about the user-space vs kernel tradeoff you >> mentioned. I did consider it but the code simplicity and ease of use >> in practice won for us and I chose to stick with the kernel driver >> approach. >> >> Note that if you are OK with this, I need to send a V2 to correct the >> Kconfig description which currently shows an invalid configuration >> command example. > > Sure, I'm not totally against it, even if I think the arguments are > very weak, and in some places also just wrong. It's not like it's a > huge driver. I am not going to try contesting that our arguments are somewhat weak. Yes, if we spend enough time on it, we could eventually get something workable with ublk. But with that said, when you spend your days developing and testing stuff for zoned storage, having a super easy to use emulation setup for VMs without any userspace dependencies does a world of good for productivity. That is a strong argument for those involved, I think. So may I send V2 for getting it queued up ? -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research
