Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 17 May 2022 10:10:48 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To:     Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>
Cc:     axboe@kernel.dk, damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com,
        pankydev8@gmail.com, dsterba@suse.com, hch@lst.de,
        linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, jiangbo.365@bytedance.com,
        linux-block@vger.kernel.org, gost.dev@samsung.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/13] support non power of 2 zoned devices
Message-ID: <20220517081048.GA13947@lst.de>
References: <CGME20220516165418eucas1p2be592d9cd4b35f6b71d39ccbe87f3fef@eucas1p2.samsung.com> <20220516165416.171196-1-p.raghav@samsung.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220516165416.171196-1-p.raghav@samsung.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Precedence: bulk

I'm a little surprised about all this activity.

I though the conclusion at LSF/MM was that for Linux itself there
is very little benefit in supporting this scheme.  It will massively
fragment the supported based of devices and applications, while only
having the benefit of supporting some Samsung legacy devices.

So my impression was that this work, while technically feasible, is
rather useless.  So unless I missed something important I have no
interest in supporting this in NVMe.