On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 01:13:45PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
Below are suggested message updates, common prefix "zoned:" in case it
happens inside the zone mode implementation. Some of them sound strange
when repeating 'zoned', but for clarity I think it should stay, unless
somebody has a better suggestion.
On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 10:51:12PM +0900, Naohiro Aota wrote:
index aac3d6f4e35b..25fd4e97dd2a 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
+++ b/fs/btrfs/ctree.h
@@ -3595,4 +3601,8 @@ static inline int btrfs_is_testing(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
}
#endif
+static inline bool btrfs_is_zoned(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
+{
+ return fs_info->zoned != 0;
+}
newline
#endif
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c b/fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c
index 6f6d77224c2b..5e3554482af1 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/dev-replace.c
@@ -238,6 +238,13 @@ static int btrfs_init_dev_replace_tgtdev(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
return PTR_ERR(bdev);
}
+ if (!btrfs_check_device_zone_type(fs_info, bdev)) {
+ btrfs_err(fs_info,
+ "zone type of target device mismatch with the filesystem!");
"dev-replace: zoned type of target device mismatch with filesystem"
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ goto error;
+ }
+
sync_blockdev(bdev);
list_for_each_entry(device, &fs_info->fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
index 764001609a15..9bc51cff48b8 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/disk-io.c
@@ -3130,7 +3133,15 @@ int __cold open_ctree(struct super_block *sb, struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_device
btrfs_free_extra_devids(fs_devices, 1);
+ ret = btrfs_check_zoned_mode(fs_info);
+ if (ret) {
+ btrfs_err(fs_info, "failed to init ZONED mode: %d",
"failed to inititialize zoned mode: %d"
+ ret);
+ goto fail_block_groups;
+ }
+
ret = btrfs_sysfs_add_fsid(fs_devices);
+
if (ret) {
btrfs_err(fs_info, "failed to init sysfs fsid interface: %d",
ret);
--- a/fs/btrfs/zoned.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/zoned.c
+ u64 nr_devices = 0;
+ u64 zone_size = 0;
+ int incompat_zoned = btrfs_is_zoned(fs_info);
const bool
+ int ret = 0;
+
+ /* Count zoned devices */
+ list_for_each_entry(device, &fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
+ enum blk_zoned_model model;
+
+ if (!device->bdev)
+ continue;
+
+ model = bdev_zoned_model(device->bdev);
+ if (model == BLK_ZONED_HM ||
+ (model == BLK_ZONED_HA && incompat_zoned)) {
+ hmzoned_devices++;
+ if (!zone_size) {
+ zone_size = device->zone_info->zone_size;
+ } else if (device->zone_info->zone_size != zone_size) {
+ btrfs_err(fs_info,
+ "Zoned block devices must have equal zone sizes");
"zoned: unequal block device zone sizes: have %u found %u"
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ goto out;
+ }
+ }
+ nr_devices++;
+ }
+
+ if (!hmzoned_devices && !incompat_zoned)
+ goto out;
+
+ if (!hmzoned_devices && incompat_zoned) {
+ /* No zoned block device found on ZONED FS */
+ btrfs_err(fs_info,
+ "ZONED enabled file system should have zoned devices");
"zoned: no zoned devices found on a zoned filesystem"
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ if (hmzoned_devices && !incompat_zoned) {
+ btrfs_err(fs_info,
+ "Enable ZONED mode to mount HMZONED device");
Is HMZONED reference leftover from previous iterations?
"zoned: mode not enabled but zoned device found"
It was intentional here to use "hmzoned", because we can technically use
Host-Aware Zoned device as regular device, so I'd like to distinguish
hmzoned vs hazoned. But, reading the code again, I changed my mind. We can
just say "a HMZONED device" or "a HAZONED device in ZONED mode" as a zoned
device. Actually, I was not counting "hazoned_devices" anyway. So, I'll
rename hmzoned_devices to zoned_devices in the next version.
