On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 10:47:25AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > This is complete bonkers. IFF we have a good reason to support non > power of two zones size (and I'd like to see evidence for that) we'll > need to go through all the layers to support it. But doing this emulation > is just idiotic and will at tons of code just to completely confuse users. > > On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 05:53:43PM +0100, Pankaj Raghav wrote: > > > > #Motivation: > > There are currently ZNS drives that are produced and deployed that do > > not have power_of_2(PO2) zone size. The NVMe spec for ZNS does not > > specify the PO2 requirement but the linux block layer currently checks > > for zoned devices to have power_of_2 zone sizes. > > Well, apparently whoever produces these drives never cared about supporting > Linux as the power of two requirement goes back to SMR HDDs, which also > don't have that requirement in the spec (and even allow non-uniform zone > size), but Linux decided that we want this for sanity. Non uniform zone size definitely seems like a mess. Fixed zone sizes that are non po2 doesn't seem insane to me given that chunk sectors is no longer assumed to be po2. We have looked at removing po2 and the only hot path optimization for po2 is for appends. > > Do these drives even support Zone Append? Should it matter if the drives support append? SMR drives do not support append and they are considered zone block devices. Append seems to be an optimization for users that want higher concurrency per zone. One can also build concurrency by leveraging multiple zones simultaneously as well.
