Hi, Christoph, On 31.01.2020 09:23, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 01:14:05AM -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote: >> I find there is some dissonance between using BLKDEV_ZERO_ALLOCATE to >> describe this operation in one case and REQ_NOZERO in the other. >> >> I understand why not zeroing is important in your case. However, I think >> the allocation aspect is semantically more important. Also, in the case >> of SCSI, the allocated blocks will typically appear zeroed. So from that >> perspective REQ_NOZERO doesn't really make sense. I would really prefer >> to use REQ_ALLOCATE to describe this operation. I agree that "do not >> write every block" is important too. I just don't have a good suggestion >> for how to express that as an additional qualifier to REQ_ALLOCATE_?. > > Agreed. Nevermind the problem of a REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES operations with > a NOZERO flag causing a massive confusion to the reader. > >> Also, adding to the confusion: In the context of SCSI, ANCHOR requires >> UNMAP. So my head hurts a bit when I read REQ_NOZERO|REQ_NOUNMAP and >> have to translate that into ANCHOR|UNMAP. >> >> Longer term, I think we should consider introducing REQ_OP_SINGLE_RANGE >> or something like that as an umbrella operation that can be used to >> describe zeroing, allocating, and other things that operate on a single >> LBA range with no payload. Thus removing both the writiness and the >> zeroness from the existing REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES conduit. > > What is the benefit of a multipler there? Given all this flags > confusion I'm almost tempted to just split up REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES into > REQ_OP_ALLOCATE ("cheap") and REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES ("potentially > expensive") and just let the caller handle the difference. Everytime > we try to encode semantic differences into flags we're eventually > running into trouble. Sais the person that added REQ_UNMAP.. We started from separated REQ_OP_ASSIGN_RANGE in v1, but then we decided to use a modifier because this looks better and scatters less over I/O stack. See "[PATCH RFC 0/3] block,ext4: Introduce REQ_OP_ASSIGN_RANGE to reflect extents allocation in block device internals" series for the details. (https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/1/7/1616 and neighbouring messages). Last version of the patchset is v5 and it's here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/1/22/643 Kirill