Re: [PATCH RFC 1/3] block: Add support for REQ_OP_ASSIGN_RANGE operation

[Martin K. Petersen]

Kirill,

> Hm. BLKDEV_ZERO_NOUNMAP is used in __blkdev_issue_write_zeroes() only.
> So, do I understand right that we should the below two?:
>
> 1) Introduce a new flag BLKDEV_ZERO_ALLOCATE for
> blkdev_issue_write_zeroes().

> 2) Introduce a new flag REQ_NOZERO in enum req_opf.

Something like that. If zeroing is a problem for you.

Right now we offer the following semantics:

	Deallocate, no zeroing (discard)

	Optionally deallocate, zeroing (zeroout)

	Allocate, zeroing (zeroout + NOUNMAP)

Some devices also implement a fourth option which would be:

	Anchor: Allocate, no zeroing

> Won't this confuse a reader that we have blkdev_issue_write_zeroes(),
> which does not write zeroes sometimes? Maybe we should rename
> blkdev_issue_write_zeroes() in some more generic name?

Maybe. The naming is what it is for hysterical raisins and reflects how
things are implemented in the storage protocols. I wouldn't worry too
much about that. We can rename things if need be but we shouldn't plumb
an essentially identical operation through the block stack just to
expose a different name at the top.

-- 
Martin K. Petersen	Oracle Linux Engineering