[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <622ae86d-39ad-c45e-ec48-42abf4b257d2@samsung.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2022 19:57:19 +0200
From: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@...sung.com>
To: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
CC: <hch@....de>, <agk@...hat.com>, <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>,
<axboe@...nel.dk>, <snitzer@...nel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <Johannes.Thumshirn@....com>,
<linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>, <pankydev8@...il.com>,
<matias.bjorling@....com>, <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
<bvanassche@....org>, <gost.dev@...sung.com>,
<dm-devel@...hat.com>, <hare@...e.de>, <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 13/13] dm: add power-of-2 target for zoned devices
with non power-of-2 zone sizes
>>
>> Are you certain you shouldn't at least be exposing a different
>> logical_block_size to upper layers?
>>
> To be honest, I tested my patches in QEMU with 4k Logical block size and on
> a device with 4k LBA size.
>
> I did a quick test with 512B LBA size in QEMU, and I didn't see any
> failures when I ran my normal test suite.
>
> Do you see any problem with exposing the same LBA as the underlying device?
>
Do you see any issues here? If not, I can send the next version with the
other two changes you suggested.
Thanks,
Pankaj
Powered by blists - more mailing lists