On 21-02-2024 18:27, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:

Doesn't this break practically all ZNS NVMe devices?

Yes, so here I'm in questioning who is really using w/ zone capacity. If there's
no user complaining, I'd like to deprecate this, since this adds code complexity
and unnecessary checks.

Hi Jaegeuk,

I like to make a couple of points to hopefully keep the support in a little while longer.

- NVMe-based zone devices continue to be developed with the pow2 zone size and zone size != zone cap features. There was some divergence in the first-gen drives. However, all the second-gen drives I know of are implemented with those features in mind.

- A very active community is doing work using f2fs, and many of those members are working with the ZN540s device (which exposes a pow2 zone size).

- For drives with a capacity of less than 16TiB, f2fs is an excellent file system to use and is really useful for various use cases. We're using the f2fs daily for a couple of our workloads.

Work is ongoing on btrfs and XFS to support zoned storage devices, but they have yet to be through the trenches as much as f2fs has been with its zone support. So it would be great to have f2fs continue to support the pow2 zone sizes, as it is a valuable feature for the currently used and second-gen drives that have been released or are soon becoming available.

If there is a performance concern with the feature re: ZUFS, maybe the pow2 implementation could be slightly more computationally expensive, as the feature, anyway, typically is used on more beefy systems.


Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list

Reply via email to