qemu-block
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [RFC v4 1/9] block: add block layer APIs resembling Linux ZonedBlock


From: Sam Li
Subject: Re: [RFC v4 1/9] block: add block layer APIs resembling Linux ZonedBlockDevice ioctls.
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2022 14:17:21 +0800

Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> 于2022年7月12日周二 14:10写道:
>
> On 7/12/22 04:13, Sam Li wrote:
> > By adding zone management operations in BlockDriver, storage
> > controller emulation can use the new block layer APIs including
> > zone_report and zone_mgmt(open, close, finish, reset).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sam Li <faithilikerun@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >   block/block-backend.c            |  41 ++++++
> >   block/coroutines.h               |   5 +
> >   block/file-posix.c               | 236 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   include/block/block-common.h     |  43 +++++-
> >   include/block/block_int-common.h |  20 +++
> >   5 files changed, 344 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/block/block-backend.c b/block/block-backend.c
> > index f425b00793..0a05247ae4 100644
> > --- a/block/block-backend.c
> > +++ b/block/block-backend.c
> > @@ -1806,6 +1806,47 @@ int blk_flush(BlockBackend *blk)
> >       return ret;
> >   }
> >
> > +/*
> > + * Send a zone_report command.
> > + * offset can be any number within the zone size. No alignment for offset.
> > + * nr_zones represents IN maximum and OUT actual.
> > + */
> > +int coroutine_fn blk_co_zone_report(BlockBackend *blk, int64_t offset,
> > +                                    int64_t *nr_zones,
> > +                                    BlockZoneDescriptor *zones)
> > +{
> > +    int ret;
> > +    IO_CODE();
> > +
> > +    blk_inc_in_flight(blk); /* increase before waiting */
> > +    blk_wait_while_drained(blk);
> > +    ret = bdrv_co_zone_report(blk->root->bs, offset, nr_zones, zones);
> > +    blk_dec_in_flight(blk);
> > +    return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Send a zone_management command.
> > + * Offset is the start of a zone and len is aligned to zones.
> > + */
> > +int coroutine_fn blk_co_zone_mgmt(BlockBackend *blk, enum zone_op op,
> > +        int64_t offset, int64_t len)
> > +{
> > +    int ret;
> > +    IO_CODE();
> > +
> > +    blk_inc_in_flight(blk);
> > +    blk_wait_while_drained(blk);
> > +    ret = blk_check_byte_request(blk, offset, len);
> > +    if (ret < 0) {
> > +        return ret;
> > +    }
> > +
> > +    ret = bdrv_co_zone_mgmt(blk->root->bs, op, offset, len);
> > +    blk_dec_in_flight(blk);
> > +    return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> >   void blk_drain(BlockBackend *blk)
> >   {
> >       BlockDriverState *bs = blk_bs(blk);
> > diff --git a/block/coroutines.h b/block/coroutines.h
> > index 830ecaa733..19aa96cc56 100644
> > --- a/block/coroutines.h
> > +++ b/block/coroutines.h
> > @@ -80,6 +80,11 @@ int coroutine_fn
> >   blk_co_do_pdiscard(BlockBackend *blk, int64_t offset, int64_t bytes);
> >
> >   int coroutine_fn blk_co_do_flush(BlockBackend *blk);
> > +int coroutine_fn blk_co_zone_report(BlockBackend *blk, int64_t offset,
> > +                                    int64_t *nr_zones,
> > +                                    BlockZoneDescriptor *zones);
> > +int coroutine_fn blk_co_zone_mgmt(BlockBackend *blk, enum zone_op op,
> > +                                  int64_t offset, int64_t len);
> >
> >
> >   /*
> > diff --git a/block/file-posix.c b/block/file-posix.c
> > index 48cd096624..e7523ae2ed 100644
> > --- a/block/file-posix.c
> > +++ b/block/file-posix.c
> > @@ -67,6 +67,7 @@
> >   #include <sys/param.h>
> >   #include <sys/syscall.h>
> >   #include <sys/vfs.h>
> > +#include <linux/blkzoned.h>
> >   #include <linux/cdrom.h>
> >   #include <linux/fd.h>
> >   #include <linux/fs.h>
> > @@ -216,6 +217,13 @@ typedef struct RawPosixAIOData {
> >               PreallocMode prealloc;
> >               Error **errp;
> >           } truncate;
> > +        struct {
> > +            int64_t *nr_zones;
>
> Why is this a pointer?
> I'd rather use a number here, seeing that it's the number
> of zones in the *zones array ...

I see. The pointer is a little redundant. Will change it.

> But the remainder looks good.

Thanks for reviewing!



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]