[lkml]   [2016]   [Aug]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v6 0/2] Block layer support ZAC/ZBC commands

On 8/10/16 12:58, Shaun Tancheff wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Damien Le Moal <> wrote:
>>> On Aug 9, 2016, at 15:47, Hannes Reinecke <> wrote:
> [trim]
>>>> Since disk type == 0 for everything that isn't HM so I would prefer the
>>>> sysfs 'zoned' file just report if the drive is HA or HM.
>>> Okay. So let's put in the 'zoned' attribute the device type:
>>> 'host-managed', 'host-aware', or 'device managed'.
>> I hacked your patches and simply put a "0" or "1" in the sysfs zoned file.
>> Any drive that has ZBC/ZAC command support gets a "1", "0" for everything
>> else. This means that drive managed models are not exposed as zoned block
>> devices. For HM vs HA differentiation, an application can look at the
>> device type file since it is already present.
>> We could indeed set the "zoned" file to the device type, but HM drives and
>> regular drives will both have "0" in it, so no differentiation possible.
>> The other choice could be the "zoned" bits defined by ZBC, but these
>> do not define a value for host managed drives, and the drive managed value
>> being not "0" could be confusing too. So I settled for a simple 0/1 boolean.
> This seems good to me.

Another option I forgot is for the "zoned" file to indicate the total
number of zones of the device, and 0 for a non zoned regular block
device. That would work as well.

>> Done: I hacked Shaun ioctl code and added finish zone too. The
>> difference with Shaun initial code is that the ioctl are propagated down to
>> the driver (__blkdev_driver_ioctl -> sd_ioctl) so that there is no need for
>> BIO request definition for the zone operations. So a lot less code added.
> The purpose of the BIO flags is not to enable the ioctls so much as
> the other way round. Creating BIO op's is to enable issuing ZBC
> commands from device mapper targets and file systems without some
> heinous ioctl hacks.
> Making the resulting block layer interfaces available via ioctls is just a
> reasonable way to exercise the code ... or that was my intent.

Yes, I understood your code. However, since (or if) we keep the zone
information in the RB-tree cache, there is no need for the report zone
operation BIO interface. Same for reset write pointer by keeping the
mapping to discard. blk_lookup_zone can be used in kernel as a report
zone BIO replacement and works as well for the report zone ioctl
implementation. For reset, there is blkdev_issue_discrad in kernel, and
the reset zone ioctl becomes equivalent to BLKDISCARD ioctl. These are
simple. Open, close and finish zone remains. For these, adding the BIO
interface seemed an overkill. Hence my choice of propagating the ioctl
to the driver.
This is debatable of course, and adding an in-kernel interface is not
hard: we can implement blk_open_zone, blk_close_zone and blk_finish_zone
using __blkdev_driver_ioctl. That looks clean to me.

Overall, my concern with the BIO based interface for the ZBC commands is
that it adds one flag for each command, which is not really the
philosophy of the interface and potentially opens the door for more such
implementations in the future with new standards and new commands coming
up. Clearly that is not a sustainable path. So I think that a more
specific interface for these zone operations is a better choice. That is
consistent with what happens with the tons of ATA and SCSI commands not
actually doing data I/Os (mode sense, log pages, SMART, etc). All these
do not use BIOs and are processed as request REQ_TYPE_BLOCK_PC.

>> The ioctls do not mimic exactly the ZBC standard. For instance, there is no
>> reporting options for report zones, nor is the "all" bit supported for open,
>> close or finish zone commands. But the information provided on zones is complete
>> and maps to the standard definitions.
> For the reporting options I have planned to reuse the stream_id in
> struct bio when that is formalized. There are certainly other places in
> struct bio to stuff a few extra bits ...

We could add reporting options to blk_lookup_zones to filter the result
and use that in the ioctl implementation as well. This can be added
without any problem.

> As far as the all bit ... this is being handled by all the zone action
> commands. Just pass a sector of ~0ul and it's handled in sd.c by
> sd_setup_zone_action_cmnd().
> Apologies as apparently my documentation here is lacking :-(

Yes, I got it (libzbc does the same actually). I did not add it for
simplicity. But indeed may be it should be. The same trick can be used
with the ioctl to driver interface. No problems.

>> I also added a reset_wp ioctl for completeness, but this one simply calls
>> blkdev_issue_discard internally, so it is in fact equivalent to the BLKDISCARD
>> ioctl call with a range exactly aligned on a zone.
> I'm confused as my patch set includes a Reset WP (BLKRESETZONE) that
> creates a REQ_OP_ZONE_RESET .. same as open and close. My
> expectation being that BLKDISCARD doesn't really need yet another alias.

Yes, we could remove the BLKRESETZONE ioctl and have applications use
the BLKDISCARD ioctl instead. In the kernel, both generate
blkdev_issue_discard calls and are thus identical. Only the ioctl
interface differs (sector vs range argument). Again, I added it to have
the full set of 5 ZBC/ZAC operations mapping to one BLKxxxZONE ioctl.
But granted, reset is optional.

Best regards.

Damien Le Moal, Ph.D.
Sr. Manager, System Software Group, HGST Research,
HGST, a Western Digital brand
(+81) 0466-98-3593 (ext. 513593)
1 kirihara-cho, Fujisawa,
Kanagawa, 252-0888 Japan
Western Digital Corporation (and its subsidiaries) E-mail Confidentiality Notice & Disclaimer:

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain confidential or legally privileged information of WDC and/or its affiliates, and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the e-mail in its entirety from your system.
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-08-10 07:21    [W:0.052 / U:2.460 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site