On 2023/12/18 15:15, Ed Tsai (蔡宗軒) wrote:
> Hi Christoph,
>
> some minor suggestions:
>
> On Sun, 2023-12-17 at 17:53 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-table.c b/drivers/md/dm-table.c
>> index 198d38b53322c1..260b5b8f2b0d7e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/md/dm-table.c
>> +++ b/drivers/md/dm-table.c
>> @@ -1579,21 +1579,18 @@ bool dm_table_has_no_data_devices(struct
>> dm_table *t)
>> return true;
>> }
>>
>> -static int device_not_zoned_model(struct dm_target *ti, struct
>> dm_dev *dev,
>> - sector_t start, sector_t len, void
>> *data)
>> +static int device_not_zoned(struct dm_target *ti, struct dm_dev
>> *dev,
>> + sector_t start, sector_t len, void *data)
>> {
>> - struct request_queue *q = bdev_get_queue(dev->bdev);
>> - enum blk_zoned_model *zoned_model = data;
>> + bool *zoned = data;
>>
>> - return blk_queue_zoned_model(q) != *zoned_model;
>> + return bdev_is_zoned(dev->bdev) != *zoned;
>> }
>>
>> static int device_is_zoned_model(struct dm_target *ti, struct dm_dev
>> *dev,
>> sector_t start, sector_t len, void
>> *data)
>
> Seems like the word "model" should also be remove here.
>
>> {
>> - struct request_queue *q = bdev_get_queue(dev->bdev);
>> -
>> - return blk_queue_zoned_model(q) != BLK_ZONED_NONE;
>> + return bdev_is_zoned(dev->bdev);
>> }
>>
>> /*
>> @@ -1603,8 +1600,7 @@ static int device_is_zoned_model(struct
>> dm_target *ti, struct dm_dev *dev,
>> * has the DM_TARGET_MIXED_ZONED_MODEL feature set, the devices can
>> have any
>> * zoned model with all zoned devices having the same zone size.
>> */
>> -static bool dm_table_supports_zoned_model(struct dm_table *t,
>> - enum blk_zoned_model
>> zoned_model)
>> +static bool dm_table_supports_zoned(struct dm_table *t, bool zoned)
>> {
>> for (unsigned int i = 0; i < t->num_targets; i++) {
>> struct dm_target *ti = dm_table_get_target(t, i);
>> @@ -1623,11 +1619,11 @@ static bool
>> dm_table_supports_zoned_model(struct dm_table *t,
>>
>> if (dm_target_supports_zoned_hm(ti->type)) {
>> if (!ti->type->iterate_devices ||
>> - ti->type->iterate_devices(ti,
>> device_not_zoned_model,
>> - &zoned_model))
>> + ti->type->iterate_devices(ti,
>> device_not_zoned,
>> + &zoned))
>> return false;
>> } else if (!dm_target_supports_mixed_zoned_model(ti-
>>> type)) {
>> - if (zoned_model == BLK_ZONED_HM)
>> + if (zoned)
>> return false;
>> }
>> }
>
> The parameter "bool zoned" is redundant. It should be removed from the
> above 3 functions
>
> Additionally, because we no longer need to distinguish the zoned model
> here, DM_TARGET_MIXED_ZONED_MODEL is meaningless. We can also clean up
> its related code.
Nope. The mixed thing is for mixing up non-zoned with zoned models.
For the entire DM code, HM and HA are both treated as HM-like zoned.
--
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research
