On 6/26/25 01:29, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 6/25/25 2:33 AM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> diff --git a/include/linux/blk_types.h b/include/linux/blk_types.h
>> index 3d1577f07c1c..930daff207df 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/blk_types.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/blk_types.h
>> @@ -350,11 +350,11 @@ enum req_op {
>> /* Close a zone */
>> REQ_OP_ZONE_CLOSE = (__force blk_opf_t)11,
>> /* Transition a zone to full */
>> - REQ_OP_ZONE_FINISH = (__force blk_opf_t)12,
>> + REQ_OP_ZONE_FINISH = (__force blk_opf_t)13,
>> /* reset a zone write pointer */
>> - REQ_OP_ZONE_RESET = (__force blk_opf_t)13,
>> + REQ_OP_ZONE_RESET = (__force blk_opf_t)15,
>> /* reset all the zone present on the device */
>> - REQ_OP_ZONE_RESET_ALL = (__force blk_opf_t)15,
>> + REQ_OP_ZONE_RESET_ALL = (__force blk_opf_t)17,
>>
>> /* Driver private requests */
>> REQ_OP_DRV_IN = (__force blk_opf_t)34,
>
> Since we are renumbering operation types, how about also
> renumbering REQ_OP_ZONE_OPEN and/or REQ_OP_ZONE_CLOSE? Neither operation
> modifies data on the storage medium nor any write pointers so these
> operations shouldn't be considered as write operations, isn't it?
Open and close change the zone condition and act on the drive count of
explicitly open zone resources which impacts the ability to write to zones. So I
would rather consider these also write operations given the changes they imply.
--
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research
