On 5/19/22 09:59, Naohiro Aota wrote:
>> +
>> static int sb_log_location(struct block_device *bdev, struct blk_zone *zones,
>> - int rw, u64 *bytenr_ret)
>> + int rw, int mirror, u64 *bytenr_ret)
>> {
>> u64 wp;
>> int ret;
>> + bool zones_empty = false;
>>
>> if (zones[0].type == BLK_ZONE_TYPE_CONVENTIONAL) {
>> *bytenr_ret = zones[0].start << SECTOR_SHIFT;
>> @@ -775,13 +808,31 @@ static int sb_log_location(struct block_device *bdev, struct blk_zone *zones,
>> if (ret != -ENOENT && ret < 0)
>> return ret;
>>
>> + if (ret == -ENOENT)
>> + zones_empty = true;
>> +
>
> I think, we don't need this. We need to issue the zeroout when
> zones[0]->cond == BLK_ZONE_COND_EMPTY && !is_power_of_2(...) after sending
> ZONE_RESET if necessary. No?
>
Yeah. I added this extra check to cover all the cases possible. But you
are right that it is enough to issue zeroout only for this condition:
zones[0]->cond == BLK_ZONE_COND_EMPTY && !is_power_of_2(...) as both the
zones empty is not likely to happen.
>> if (rw == WRITE) {
>> struct blk_zone *reset = NULL;
>> + bool is_sb_offset_write_req = false;
>> + u32 reset_zone_nr = -1;
>>
>> - if (wp == zones[0].start << SECTOR_SHIFT)
>> + if (wp == zones[0].start << SECTOR_SHIFT) {
>> reset = &zones[0];
>> - else if (wp == zones[1].start << SECTOR_SHIFT)
>> + reset_zone_nr = 0;
