On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 04:23:46PM +0000, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > On 07/03/2022 16:44, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 08:56:30AM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: > >> btrfs maps zones to block groups and the sectors between zone capacity > >> and zone size are marked as unusable. The report above is not showing > >> that. The coding is correct though. The block allocation will not be > >> attempted beyond zone capacity. > > > > That does not explain or justify why zone size was used instead of zone > > capacity. Using the zones size gives an incorrect inflated sense of actual > > capacity, and users / userspace applications can easily missuse that. > > > > Should other filesystems follow this logic as well? If so why? > > > > The justification is, when btrfs zoned support was implemented there was no > zone capacity. This started with zns and thus btrfs' knowledge of > zone_capacity came with it's zns support. So instead of playing the blame > game for whatever reason I don't want to know, you could have reported the > bug or fixed it yourself. I didn't realize it would be acknowledged as a bug, now that it is I'll just go send a fix, thanks! Luis
