On Sat, Apr 26, 2025 at 01:23:08AM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: > On 4/25/25 09:47, hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 12:04:39AM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: > > > and in userspace that assumes 512-byte granularity. But there is no > > > such deeply-ingrained assumption for zones. You just have to set the > > > parameter correctly. > > > > There are everywhere in software actually using zones. You still > > haven't answered whay your intended use case is, btw. > > I'm working on testing... I thought I would send a few bug fixes upstream in advance... > > who knew I would get such a hostile response The constraints you're suggesting fly in the face of all conventional wisdom from developing zone devices. It would be a bit naive to think proposing such a thing wouldn't pique some skepticism. Whether the zones you're talking about are coming from SSD flash erase blocks or HDD shingled tracks, both work on granularities orders of magnitude larger than kilobytes. If there's something else we don't know about, then it would be quite a novel device that warrants further discussion. If no such device actually exists, then it's a bit of a moot point whether anything supports it or not.
