* [PATCH v3 1/4] fsstress: add IO_URING read and write operations
2020-08-23 6:30 [PATCH v3 0/4] fsstress,fsx: add io_uring test and do some fix Zorro Lang
@ 2020-08-23 6:30 ` Zorro Lang
2020-09-03 12:42 ` Brian Foster
2020-08-23 6:30 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] fsstress: reduce the number of events when io_setup Zorro Lang
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Zorro Lang @ 2020-08-23 6:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: fstests; +Cc: axboe, io-uring
IO_URING is a new feature of curent linux kernel, add basic IO_URING
read/write into fsstess to cover this kind of IO testing.
Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <[email protected]>
---
README | 4 +-
configure.ac | 1 +
include/builddefs.in | 1 +
ltp/Makefile | 5 ++
ltp/fsstress.c | 139 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
m4/Makefile | 1 +
m4/package_liburing.m4 | 4 ++
7 files changed, 152 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 m4/package_liburing.m4
diff --git a/README b/README
index d0e23fcd..ae0f804d 100644
--- a/README
+++ b/README
@@ -8,13 +8,13 @@ _______________________
sudo apt-get install xfslibs-dev uuid-dev libtool-bin \
e2fsprogs automake gcc libuuid1 quota attr libattr1-dev make \
libacl1-dev libaio-dev xfsprogs libgdbm-dev gawk fio dbench \
- uuid-runtime python sqlite3
+ uuid-runtime python sqlite3 liburing-dev
For Fedora, RHEL, or CentOS:
yum install acl attr automake bc dbench dump e2fsprogs fio \
gawk gcc indent libtool lvm2 make psmisc quota sed \
xfsdump xfsprogs \
libacl-devel libattr-devel libaio-devel libuuid-devel \
- xfsprogs-devel btrfs-progs-devel python sqlite
+ xfsprogs-devel btrfs-progs-devel python sqlite liburing-devel
(Older distributions may require xfsprogs-qa-devel as well.)
(Note that for RHEL and CentOS, you may need the EPEL repo.)
- run make
diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index 4bb50b32..8922c47e 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ AC_PACKAGE_NEED_ACLINIT_LIBACL
AC_PACKAGE_WANT_GDBM
AC_PACKAGE_WANT_AIO
+AC_PACKAGE_WANT_URING
AC_PACKAGE_WANT_DMAPI
AC_PACKAGE_WANT_LINUX_FIEMAP_H
AC_PACKAGE_WANT_FALLOCATE
diff --git a/include/builddefs.in b/include/builddefs.in
index e7894b1a..fded3230 100644
--- a/include/builddefs.in
+++ b/include/builddefs.in
@@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ RPM_VERSION = @rpm_version@
ENABLE_SHARED = @enable_shared@
HAVE_DB = @have_db@
HAVE_AIO = @have_aio@
+HAVE_URING = @have_uring@
HAVE_FALLOCATE = @have_fallocate@
HAVE_OPEN_BY_HANDLE_AT = @have_open_by_handle_at@
HAVE_DMAPI = @have_dmapi@
diff --git a/ltp/Makefile b/ltp/Makefile
index ebf40336..198d930f 100644
--- a/ltp/Makefile
+++ b/ltp/Makefile
@@ -24,6 +24,11 @@ LCFLAGS += -DAIO
LLDLIBS += -laio -lpthread
endif
+ifeq ($(HAVE_URING), true)
+LCFLAGS += -DURING
+LLDLIBS += -luring
+endif
+
ifeq ($(HAVE_LIBBTRFSUTIL), true)
LLDLIBS += -lbtrfsutil
endif
diff --git a/ltp/fsstress.c b/ltp/fsstress.c
index 709fdeec..7a0e278a 100644
--- a/ltp/fsstress.c
+++ b/ltp/fsstress.c
@@ -30,6 +30,11 @@
#include <libaio.h>
io_context_t io_ctx;
#endif
+#ifdef URING
+#include <liburing.h>
+#define URING_ENTRIES 1
+struct io_uring ring;
+#endif
#include <sys/syscall.h>
#include <sys/xattr.h>
@@ -139,6 +144,8 @@ typedef enum {
OP_TRUNCATE,
OP_UNLINK,
OP_UNRESVSP,
+ OP_URING_READ,
+ OP_URING_WRITE,
OP_WRITE,
OP_WRITEV,
OP_LAST
@@ -267,6 +274,8 @@ void sync_f(int, long);
void truncate_f(int, long);
void unlink_f(int, long);
void unresvsp_f(int, long);
+void uring_read_f(int, long);
+void uring_write_f(int, long);
void write_f(int, long);
void writev_f(int, long);
char *xattr_flag_to_string(int);
@@ -335,6 +344,8 @@ opdesc_t ops[] = {
{ OP_TRUNCATE, "truncate", truncate_f, 2, 1 },
{ OP_UNLINK, "unlink", unlink_f, 1, 1 },
{ OP_UNRESVSP, "unresvsp", unresvsp_f, 1, 1 },
+ { OP_URING_READ, "uring_read", uring_read_f, 1, 0 },
+ { OP_URING_WRITE, "uring_write", uring_write_f, 1, 1 },
{ OP_WRITE, "write", write_f, 4, 1 },
{ OP_WRITEV, "writev", writev_f, 4, 1 },
}, *ops_end;
@@ -692,6 +703,12 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
fprintf(stderr, "io_setup failed");
exit(1);
}
+#endif
+#ifdef URING
+ if (io_uring_queue_init(URING_ENTRIES, &ring, 0)) {
+ fprintf(stderr, "io_uring_queue_init failed\n");
+ exit(1);
+ }
#endif
for (i = 0; !loops || (i < loops); i++)
doproc();
@@ -701,7 +718,9 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
return 1;
}
#endif
-
+#ifdef URING
+ io_uring_queue_exit(&ring);
+#endif
cleanup_flist();
free(freq_table);
return 0;
@@ -2170,6 +2189,108 @@ do_aio_rw(int opno, long r, int flags)
}
#endif
+#ifdef URING
+void
+do_uring_rw(int opno, long r, int flags)
+{
+ char *buf;
+ int e;
+ pathname_t f;
+ int fd;
+ size_t len;
+ int64_t lr;
+ off64_t off;
+ struct stat64 stb;
+ int v;
+ char st[1024];
+ struct io_uring_sqe *sqe;
+ struct io_uring_cqe *cqe;
+ struct iovec iovec;
+ int iswrite = (flags & (O_WRONLY | O_RDWR)) ? 1 : 0;
+
+ init_pathname(&f);
+ if (!get_fname(FT_REGFILE, r, &f, NULL, NULL, &v)) {
+ if (v)
+ printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - no filename\n", procid, opno);
+ goto uring_out3;
+ }
+ fd = open_path(&f, flags);
+ e = fd < 0 ? errno : 0;
+ check_cwd();
+ if (fd < 0) {
+ if (v)
+ printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - open %s failed %d\n",
+ procid, opno, f.path, e);
+ goto uring_out3;
+ }
+ if (fstat64(fd, &stb) < 0) {
+ if (v)
+ printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - fstat64 %s failed %d\n",
+ procid, opno, f.path, errno);
+ goto uring_out2;
+ }
+ inode_info(st, sizeof(st), &stb, v);
+ if (!iswrite && stb.st_size == 0) {
+ if (v)
+ printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - %s%s zero size\n", procid, opno,
+ f.path, st);
+ goto uring_out2;
+ }
+ sqe = io_uring_get_sqe(&ring);
+ if (!sqe) {
+ if (v)
+ printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - io_uring_get_sqe failed\n",
+ procid, opno);
+ goto uring_out2;
+ }
+ lr = ((int64_t)random() << 32) + random();
+ len = (random() % FILELEN_MAX) + 1;
+ buf = malloc(len);
+ if (!buf) {
+ if (v)
+ printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - malloc failed\n",
+ procid, opno);
+ goto uring_out2;
+ }
+ iovec.iov_base = buf;
+ iovec.iov_len = len;
+ if (iswrite) {
+ off = (off64_t)(lr % MIN(stb.st_size + (1024 * 1024), MAXFSIZE));
+ off %= maxfsize;
+ memset(buf, nameseq & 0xff, len);
+ io_uring_prep_writev(sqe, fd, &iovec, 1, off);
+ } else {
+ off = (off64_t)(lr % stb.st_size);
+ io_uring_prep_readv(sqe, fd, &iovec, 1, off);
+ }
+
+ if ((e = io_uring_submit_and_wait(&ring, 1)) != 1) {
+ if (v)
+ printf("%d/%d: %s - io_uring_submit failed %d\n", procid, opno,
+ iswrite ? "uring_write" : "uring_read", e);
+ goto uring_out1;
+ }
+ if ((e = io_uring_wait_cqe(&ring, &cqe)) < 0) {
+ if (v)
+ printf("%d/%d: %s - io_uring_wait_cqe failed %d\n", procid, opno,
+ iswrite ? "uring_write" : "uring_read", e);
+ goto uring_out1;
+ }
+ if (v)
+ printf("%d/%d: %s %s%s [%lld, %d(res=%d)] %d\n",
+ procid, opno, iswrite ? "uring_write" : "uring_read",
+ f.path, st, (long long)off, (int)len, cqe->res, e);
+ io_uring_cqe_seen(&ring, cqe);
+
+ uring_out1:
+ free(buf);
+ uring_out2:
+ close(fd);
+ uring_out3:
+ free_pathname(&f);
+}
+#endif
+
void
aread_f(int opno, long r)
{
@@ -5044,6 +5165,22 @@ unresvsp_f(int opno, long r)
close(fd);
}
+void
+uring_read_f(int opno, long r)
+{
+#ifdef URING
+ do_uring_rw(opno, r, O_RDONLY);
+#endif
+}
+
+void
+uring_write_f(int opno, long r)
+{
+#ifdef URING
+ do_uring_rw(opno, r, O_WRONLY);
+#endif
+}
+
void
write_f(int opno, long r)
{
diff --git a/m4/Makefile b/m4/Makefile
index 7fbff822..0352534d 100644
--- a/m4/Makefile
+++ b/m4/Makefile
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ LSRCFILES = \
package_dmapidev.m4 \
package_globals.m4 \
package_libcdev.m4 \
+ package_liburing.m4 \
package_ncurses.m4 \
package_pthread.m4 \
package_ssldev.m4 \
diff --git a/m4/package_liburing.m4 b/m4/package_liburing.m4
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..c92cc02a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/m4/package_liburing.m4
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+AC_DEFUN([AC_PACKAGE_WANT_URING],
+ [ AC_CHECK_HEADERS(liburing.h, [ have_uring=true ], [ have_uring=false ])
+ AC_SUBST(have_uring)
+ ])
--
2.20.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] fsstress: add IO_URING read and write operations
2020-08-23 6:30 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] fsstress: add IO_URING read and write operations Zorro Lang
@ 2020-09-03 12:42 ` Brian Foster
2020-09-03 14:07 ` Jens Axboe
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Brian Foster @ 2020-09-03 12:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zorro Lang; +Cc: fstests, axboe, io-uring
On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 02:30:29PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> IO_URING is a new feature of curent linux kernel, add basic IO_URING
> read/write into fsstess to cover this kind of IO testing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <[email protected]>
> ---
> README | 4 +-
> configure.ac | 1 +
> include/builddefs.in | 1 +
> ltp/Makefile | 5 ++
> ltp/fsstress.c | 139 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> m4/Makefile | 1 +
> m4/package_liburing.m4 | 4 ++
> 7 files changed, 152 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 m4/package_liburing.m4
>
...
> diff --git a/ltp/fsstress.c b/ltp/fsstress.c
> index 709fdeec..7a0e278a 100644
> --- a/ltp/fsstress.c
> +++ b/ltp/fsstress.c
...
> @@ -2170,6 +2189,108 @@ do_aio_rw(int opno, long r, int flags)
> }
> #endif
>
> +#ifdef URING
> +void
> +do_uring_rw(int opno, long r, int flags)
> +{
> + char *buf;
> + int e;
> + pathname_t f;
> + int fd;
> + size_t len;
> + int64_t lr;
> + off64_t off;
> + struct stat64 stb;
> + int v;
> + char st[1024];
> + struct io_uring_sqe *sqe;
> + struct io_uring_cqe *cqe;
> + struct iovec iovec;
> + int iswrite = (flags & (O_WRONLY | O_RDWR)) ? 1 : 0;
> +
> + init_pathname(&f);
> + if (!get_fname(FT_REGFILE, r, &f, NULL, NULL, &v)) {
> + if (v)
> + printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - no filename\n", procid, opno);
> + goto uring_out3;
> + }
> + fd = open_path(&f, flags);
> + e = fd < 0 ? errno : 0;
> + check_cwd();
> + if (fd < 0) {
> + if (v)
> + printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - open %s failed %d\n",
> + procid, opno, f.path, e);
> + goto uring_out3;
> + }
> + if (fstat64(fd, &stb) < 0) {
> + if (v)
> + printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - fstat64 %s failed %d\n",
> + procid, opno, f.path, errno);
> + goto uring_out2;
> + }
> + inode_info(st, sizeof(st), &stb, v);
> + if (!iswrite && stb.st_size == 0) {
> + if (v)
> + printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - %s%s zero size\n", procid, opno,
> + f.path, st);
> + goto uring_out2;
> + }
> + sqe = io_uring_get_sqe(&ring);
> + if (!sqe) {
> + if (v)
> + printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - io_uring_get_sqe failed\n",
> + procid, opno);
> + goto uring_out2;
> + }
I'm not familiar with the io_uring bits, but do we have to do anything
to clean up this sqe object (or the cqe) before we return?
> + lr = ((int64_t)random() << 32) + random();
> + len = (random() % FILELEN_MAX) + 1;
> + buf = malloc(len);
> + if (!buf) {
> + if (v)
> + printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - malloc failed\n",
> + procid, opno);
> + goto uring_out2;
> + }
> + iovec.iov_base = buf;
> + iovec.iov_len = len;
> + if (iswrite) {
> + off = (off64_t)(lr % MIN(stb.st_size + (1024 * 1024), MAXFSIZE));
> + off %= maxfsize;
> + memset(buf, nameseq & 0xff, len);
> + io_uring_prep_writev(sqe, fd, &iovec, 1, off);
> + } else {
> + off = (off64_t)(lr % stb.st_size);
> + io_uring_prep_readv(sqe, fd, &iovec, 1, off);
> + }
> +
> + if ((e = io_uring_submit_and_wait(&ring, 1)) != 1) {
> + if (v)
> + printf("%d/%d: %s - io_uring_submit failed %d\n", procid, opno,
> + iswrite ? "uring_write" : "uring_read", e);
> + goto uring_out1;
> + }
> + if ((e = io_uring_wait_cqe(&ring, &cqe)) < 0) {
> + if (v)
> + printf("%d/%d: %s - io_uring_wait_cqe failed %d\n", procid, opno,
> + iswrite ? "uring_write" : "uring_read", e);
> + goto uring_out1;
> + }
> + if (v)
> + printf("%d/%d: %s %s%s [%lld, %d(res=%d)] %d\n",
> + procid, opno, iswrite ? "uring_write" : "uring_read",
> + f.path, st, (long long)off, (int)len, cqe->res, e);
> + io_uring_cqe_seen(&ring, cqe);
> +
> + uring_out1:
> + free(buf);
> + uring_out2:
> + close(fd);
> + uring_out3:
> + free_pathname(&f);
It looks like the free_pathname() call is unconditional on exit. Could
we just initialize the other two variables properly and have something
like:
{
...
out:
if (buf)
free(buf);
if (fd != -1)
close(fd);
free_pathname(&f);
}
... and then we don't have to worry about using three different exit
labels in the right places?
Brian
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> void
> aread_f(int opno, long r)
> {
> @@ -5044,6 +5165,22 @@ unresvsp_f(int opno, long r)
> close(fd);
> }
>
> +void
> +uring_read_f(int opno, long r)
> +{
> +#ifdef URING
> + do_uring_rw(opno, r, O_RDONLY);
> +#endif
> +}
> +
> +void
> +uring_write_f(int opno, long r)
> +{
> +#ifdef URING
> + do_uring_rw(opno, r, O_WRONLY);
> +#endif
> +}
> +
> void
> write_f(int opno, long r)
> {
> diff --git a/m4/Makefile b/m4/Makefile
> index 7fbff822..0352534d 100644
> --- a/m4/Makefile
> +++ b/m4/Makefile
> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ LSRCFILES = \
> package_dmapidev.m4 \
> package_globals.m4 \
> package_libcdev.m4 \
> + package_liburing.m4 \
> package_ncurses.m4 \
> package_pthread.m4 \
> package_ssldev.m4 \
> diff --git a/m4/package_liburing.m4 b/m4/package_liburing.m4
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..c92cc02a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/m4/package_liburing.m4
> @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
> +AC_DEFUN([AC_PACKAGE_WANT_URING],
> + [ AC_CHECK_HEADERS(liburing.h, [ have_uring=true ], [ have_uring=false ])
> + AC_SUBST(have_uring)
> + ])
> --
> 2.20.1
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] fsstress: add IO_URING read and write operations
2020-09-03 12:42 ` Brian Foster
@ 2020-09-03 14:07 ` Jens Axboe
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Jens Axboe @ 2020-09-03 14:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Brian Foster, Zorro Lang; +Cc: fstests, io-uring
On 9/3/20 6:42 AM, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 02:30:29PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
>> IO_URING is a new feature of curent linux kernel, add basic IO_URING
>> read/write into fsstess to cover this kind of IO testing.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> README | 4 +-
>> configure.ac | 1 +
>> include/builddefs.in | 1 +
>> ltp/Makefile | 5 ++
>> ltp/fsstress.c | 139 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> m4/Makefile | 1 +
>> m4/package_liburing.m4 | 4 ++
>> 7 files changed, 152 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 m4/package_liburing.m4
>>
> ...
>> diff --git a/ltp/fsstress.c b/ltp/fsstress.c
>> index 709fdeec..7a0e278a 100644
>> --- a/ltp/fsstress.c
>> +++ b/ltp/fsstress.c
> ...
>> @@ -2170,6 +2189,108 @@ do_aio_rw(int opno, long r, int flags)
>> }
>> #endif
>>
>> +#ifdef URING
>> +void
>> +do_uring_rw(int opno, long r, int flags)
>> +{
>> + char *buf;
>> + int e;
>> + pathname_t f;
>> + int fd;
>> + size_t len;
>> + int64_t lr;
>> + off64_t off;
>> + struct stat64 stb;
>> + int v;
>> + char st[1024];
>> + struct io_uring_sqe *sqe;
>> + struct io_uring_cqe *cqe;
>> + struct iovec iovec;
>> + int iswrite = (flags & (O_WRONLY | O_RDWR)) ? 1 : 0;
>> +
>> + init_pathname(&f);
>> + if (!get_fname(FT_REGFILE, r, &f, NULL, NULL, &v)) {
>> + if (v)
>> + printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - no filename\n", procid, opno);
>> + goto uring_out3;
>> + }
>> + fd = open_path(&f, flags);
>> + e = fd < 0 ? errno : 0;
>> + check_cwd();
>> + if (fd < 0) {
>> + if (v)
>> + printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - open %s failed %d\n",
>> + procid, opno, f.path, e);
>> + goto uring_out3;
>> + }
>> + if (fstat64(fd, &stb) < 0) {
>> + if (v)
>> + printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - fstat64 %s failed %d\n",
>> + procid, opno, f.path, errno);
>> + goto uring_out2;
>> + }
>> + inode_info(st, sizeof(st), &stb, v);
>> + if (!iswrite && stb.st_size == 0) {
>> + if (v)
>> + printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - %s%s zero size\n", procid, opno,
>> + f.path, st);
>> + goto uring_out2;
>> + }
>> + sqe = io_uring_get_sqe(&ring);
>> + if (!sqe) {
>> + if (v)
>> + printf("%d/%d: do_uring_rw - io_uring_get_sqe failed\n",
>> + procid, opno);
>> + goto uring_out2;
>> + }
>
> I'm not familiar with the io_uring bits, but do we have to do anything
> to clean up this sqe object (or the cqe) before we return?
The cqe/sqe resources are tied to the ring, so as long as
io_uring_queue_exit() is called, then they are freed. And it is after
the run, so looks fine to me.
--
Jens Axboe
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3 2/4] fsstress: reduce the number of events when io_setup
2020-08-23 6:30 [PATCH v3 0/4] fsstress,fsx: add io_uring test and do some fix Zorro Lang
2020-08-23 6:30 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] fsstress: add IO_URING read and write operations Zorro Lang
@ 2020-08-23 6:30 ` Zorro Lang
2020-09-03 12:42 ` Brian Foster
2020-08-23 6:30 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] fsstress: fix memory leak in do_aio_rw Zorro Lang
2020-08-23 6:30 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] fsx: add IO_URING test Zorro Lang
3 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Zorro Lang @ 2020-08-23 6:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: fstests; +Cc: axboe, io-uring
The original number(128) of aio events for io_setup too big. When try
to run lots of fsstress processes(e.g. -p 1000) always hit io_setup
EAGAIN error, due to the nr_events exceeds the limit of available
events. Due to each fsstress process only does once libaio read/write
operation each time. So reduce the aio events number to 1, to make more
fsstress processes can do AIO test.
Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <[email protected]>
---
ltp/fsstress.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ltp/fsstress.c b/ltp/fsstress.c
index 7a0e278a..ef2017a8 100644
--- a/ltp/fsstress.c
+++ b/ltp/fsstress.c
@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
#endif
#ifdef AIO
#include <libaio.h>
+#define AIO_ENTRIES 1
io_context_t io_ctx;
#endif
#ifdef URING
@@ -699,8 +700,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
}
procid = i;
#ifdef AIO
- if (io_setup(128, &io_ctx) != 0) {
- fprintf(stderr, "io_setup failed");
+ if (io_setup(AIO_ENTRIES, &io_ctx) != 0) {
+ fprintf(stderr, "io_setup failed\n");
exit(1);
}
#endif
--
2.20.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] fsstress: reduce the number of events when io_setup
2020-08-23 6:30 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] fsstress: reduce the number of events when io_setup Zorro Lang
@ 2020-09-03 12:42 ` Brian Foster
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Brian Foster @ 2020-09-03 12:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zorro Lang; +Cc: fstests, axboe, io-uring
On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 02:30:30PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> The original number(128) of aio events for io_setup too big. When try
> to run lots of fsstress processes(e.g. -p 1000) always hit io_setup
> EAGAIN error, due to the nr_events exceeds the limit of available
> events. Due to each fsstress process only does once libaio read/write
> operation each time. So reduce the aio events number to 1, to make more
> fsstress processes can do AIO test.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <[email protected]>
> ---
Reviewed-by: Brian Foster <[email protected]>
> ltp/fsstress.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/ltp/fsstress.c b/ltp/fsstress.c
> index 7a0e278a..ef2017a8 100644
> --- a/ltp/fsstress.c
> +++ b/ltp/fsstress.c
> @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
> #endif
> #ifdef AIO
> #include <libaio.h>
> +#define AIO_ENTRIES 1
> io_context_t io_ctx;
> #endif
> #ifdef URING
> @@ -699,8 +700,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
> }
> procid = i;
> #ifdef AIO
> - if (io_setup(128, &io_ctx) != 0) {
> - fprintf(stderr, "io_setup failed");
> + if (io_setup(AIO_ENTRIES, &io_ctx) != 0) {
> + fprintf(stderr, "io_setup failed\n");
> exit(1);
> }
> #endif
> --
> 2.20.1
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3 3/4] fsstress: fix memory leak in do_aio_rw
2020-08-23 6:30 [PATCH v3 0/4] fsstress,fsx: add io_uring test and do some fix Zorro Lang
2020-08-23 6:30 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] fsstress: add IO_URING read and write operations Zorro Lang
2020-08-23 6:30 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] fsstress: reduce the number of events when io_setup Zorro Lang
@ 2020-08-23 6:30 ` Zorro Lang
2020-09-03 12:43 ` Brian Foster
2020-08-23 6:30 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] fsx: add IO_URING test Zorro Lang
3 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Zorro Lang @ 2020-08-23 6:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: fstests; +Cc: axboe, io-uring
If io_submit or io_getevents fails, the do_aio_rw() won't free the
"buf" and cause memory leak.
Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <[email protected]>
---
ltp/fsstress.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++---------------
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ltp/fsstress.c b/ltp/fsstress.c
index ef2017a8..17b024b5 100644
--- a/ltp/fsstress.c
+++ b/ltp/fsstress.c
@@ -2099,8 +2099,7 @@ do_aio_rw(int opno, long r, int flags)
if (!get_fname(FT_REGFILE, r, &f, NULL, NULL, &v)) {
if (v)
printf("%d/%d: do_aio_rw - no filename\n", procid, opno);
- free_pathname(&f);
- return;
+ goto aio_out3;
}
fd = open_path(&f, flags|O_DIRECT);
e = fd < 0 ? errno : 0;
@@ -2109,16 +2108,13 @@ do_aio_rw(int opno, long r, int flags)
if (v)
printf("%d/%d: do_aio_rw - open %s failed %d\n",
procid, opno, f.path, e);
- free_pathname(&f);
- return;
+ goto aio_out3;
}
if (fstat64(fd, &stb) < 0) {
if (v)
printf("%d/%d: do_aio_rw - fstat64 %s failed %d\n",
procid, opno, f.path, errno);
- free_pathname(&f);
- close(fd);
- return;
+ goto aio_out2;
}
inode_info(st, sizeof(st), &stb, v);
if (!iswrite && stb.st_size == 0) {
@@ -2150,6 +2146,12 @@ do_aio_rw(int opno, long r, int flags)
else if (len > diob.d_maxiosz)
len = diob.d_maxiosz;
buf = memalign(diob.d_mem, len);
+ if (!buf) {
+ if (v)
+ printf("%d/%d: do_aio_rw - memalign failed\n",
+ procid, opno);
+ goto aio_out2;
+ }
if (iswrite) {
off = (off64_t)(lr % MIN(stb.st_size + (1024 * 1024), MAXFSIZE));
@@ -2166,27 +2168,26 @@ do_aio_rw(int opno, long r, int flags)
if (v)
printf("%d/%d: %s - io_submit failed %d\n",
procid, opno, iswrite ? "awrite" : "aread", e);
- free_pathname(&f);
- close(fd);
- return;
+ goto aio_out1;
}
if ((e = io_getevents(io_ctx, 1, 1, &event, NULL)) != 1) {
if (v)
printf("%d/%d: %s - io_getevents failed %d\n",
procid, opno, iswrite ? "awrite" : "aread", e);
- free_pathname(&f);
- close(fd);
- return;
+ goto aio_out1;
}
e = event.res != len ? event.res2 : 0;
- free(buf);
if (v)
printf("%d/%d: %s %s%s [%lld,%d] %d\n",
procid, opno, iswrite ? "awrite" : "aread",
f.path, st, (long long)off, (int)len, e);
- free_pathname(&f);
+ aio_out1:
+ free(buf);
+ aio_out2:
close(fd);
+ aio_out3:
+ free_pathname(&f);
}
#endif
--
2.20.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] fsstress: fix memory leak in do_aio_rw
2020-08-23 6:30 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] fsstress: fix memory leak in do_aio_rw Zorro Lang
@ 2020-09-03 12:43 ` Brian Foster
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Brian Foster @ 2020-09-03 12:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zorro Lang; +Cc: fstests, axboe, io-uring
On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 02:30:31PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> If io_submit or io_getevents fails, the do_aio_rw() won't free the
> "buf" and cause memory leak.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <[email protected]>
> ---
Can we use the same approach here as suggested in patch 1 to reduce the
number of labels? Otherwise looks Ok to me..
Brian
> ltp/fsstress.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/ltp/fsstress.c b/ltp/fsstress.c
> index ef2017a8..17b024b5 100644
> --- a/ltp/fsstress.c
> +++ b/ltp/fsstress.c
> @@ -2099,8 +2099,7 @@ do_aio_rw(int opno, long r, int flags)
> if (!get_fname(FT_REGFILE, r, &f, NULL, NULL, &v)) {
> if (v)
> printf("%d/%d: do_aio_rw - no filename\n", procid, opno);
> - free_pathname(&f);
> - return;
> + goto aio_out3;
> }
> fd = open_path(&f, flags|O_DIRECT);
> e = fd < 0 ? errno : 0;
> @@ -2109,16 +2108,13 @@ do_aio_rw(int opno, long r, int flags)
> if (v)
> printf("%d/%d: do_aio_rw - open %s failed %d\n",
> procid, opno, f.path, e);
> - free_pathname(&f);
> - return;
> + goto aio_out3;
> }
> if (fstat64(fd, &stb) < 0) {
> if (v)
> printf("%d/%d: do_aio_rw - fstat64 %s failed %d\n",
> procid, opno, f.path, errno);
> - free_pathname(&f);
> - close(fd);
> - return;
> + goto aio_out2;
> }
> inode_info(st, sizeof(st), &stb, v);
> if (!iswrite && stb.st_size == 0) {
> @@ -2150,6 +2146,12 @@ do_aio_rw(int opno, long r, int flags)
> else if (len > diob.d_maxiosz)
> len = diob.d_maxiosz;
> buf = memalign(diob.d_mem, len);
> + if (!buf) {
> + if (v)
> + printf("%d/%d: do_aio_rw - memalign failed\n",
> + procid, opno);
> + goto aio_out2;
> + }
>
> if (iswrite) {
> off = (off64_t)(lr % MIN(stb.st_size + (1024 * 1024), MAXFSIZE));
> @@ -2166,27 +2168,26 @@ do_aio_rw(int opno, long r, int flags)
> if (v)
> printf("%d/%d: %s - io_submit failed %d\n",
> procid, opno, iswrite ? "awrite" : "aread", e);
> - free_pathname(&f);
> - close(fd);
> - return;
> + goto aio_out1;
> }
> if ((e = io_getevents(io_ctx, 1, 1, &event, NULL)) != 1) {
> if (v)
> printf("%d/%d: %s - io_getevents failed %d\n",
> procid, opno, iswrite ? "awrite" : "aread", e);
> - free_pathname(&f);
> - close(fd);
> - return;
> + goto aio_out1;
> }
>
> e = event.res != len ? event.res2 : 0;
> - free(buf);
> if (v)
> printf("%d/%d: %s %s%s [%lld,%d] %d\n",
> procid, opno, iswrite ? "awrite" : "aread",
> f.path, st, (long long)off, (int)len, e);
> - free_pathname(&f);
> + aio_out1:
> + free(buf);
> + aio_out2:
> close(fd);
> + aio_out3:
> + free_pathname(&f);
> }
> #endif
>
> --
> 2.20.1
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3 4/4] fsx: add IO_URING test
2020-08-23 6:30 [PATCH v3 0/4] fsstress,fsx: add io_uring test and do some fix Zorro Lang
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2020-08-23 6:30 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] fsstress: fix memory leak in do_aio_rw Zorro Lang
@ 2020-08-23 6:30 ` Zorro Lang
2020-09-03 12:44 ` Brian Foster
3 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Zorro Lang @ 2020-08-23 6:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: fstests; +Cc: axboe, io-uring
New IO_URING test for fsx, use -U option to enable IO_URING test.
Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <[email protected]>
---
ltp/fsx.c | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 144 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ltp/fsx.c b/ltp/fsx.c
index 7c76655a..05663528 100644
--- a/ltp/fsx.c
+++ b/ltp/fsx.c
@@ -34,6 +34,9 @@
#ifdef AIO
#include <libaio.h>
#endif
+#ifdef URING
+#include <liburing.h>
+#endif
#include <sys/syscall.h>
#ifndef MAP_FILE
@@ -176,21 +179,17 @@ int integrity = 0; /* -i flag */
int fsxgoodfd = 0;
int o_direct; /* -Z */
int aio = 0;
+int uring = 0;
int mark_nr = 0;
int page_size;
int page_mask;
int mmap_mask;
-#ifdef AIO
-int aio_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset);
+int fsx_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset);
#define READ 0
#define WRITE 1
-#define fsxread(a,b,c,d) aio_rw(READ, a,b,c,d)
-#define fsxwrite(a,b,c,d) aio_rw(WRITE, a,b,c,d)
-#else
-#define fsxread(a,b,c,d) read(a,b,c)
-#define fsxwrite(a,b,c,d) write(a,b,c)
-#endif
+#define fsxread(a,b,c,d) fsx_rw(READ, a,b,c,d)
+#define fsxwrite(a,b,c,d) fsx_rw(WRITE, a,b,c,d)
const char *replayops = NULL;
const char *recordops = NULL;
@@ -2242,7 +2241,7 @@ void
usage(void)
{
fprintf(stdout, "usage: %s",
- "fsx [-dknqxABEFJLOWZ] [-b opnum] [-c Prob] [-g filldata] [-i logdev] [-j logid] [-l flen] [-m start:end] [-o oplen] [-p progressinterval] [-r readbdy] [-s style] [-t truncbdy] [-w writebdy] [-D startingop] [-N numops] [-P dirpath] [-S seed] fname\n\
+ "fsx [-dknqxBEFJLOWZ][-A|-U] [-b opnum] [-c Prob] [-g filldata] [-i logdev] [-j logid] [-l flen] [-m start:end] [-o oplen] [-p progressinterval] [-r readbdy] [-s style] [-t truncbdy] [-w writebdy] [-D startingop] [-N numops] [-P dirpath] [-S seed] fname\n\
-b opnum: beginning operation number (default 1)\n\
-c P: 1 in P chance of file close+open at each op (default infinity)\n\
-d: debug output for all operations\n\
@@ -2265,7 +2264,10 @@ usage(void)
-y synchronize changes to a file\n"
#ifdef AIO
-" -A: Use the AIO system calls\n"
+" -A: Use the AIO system calls, -A excludes -U\n"
+#endif
+#ifdef URING
+" -U: Use the IO_URING system calls, -U excludes -A\n"
#endif
" -D startingop: debug output starting at specified operation\n"
#ifdef HAVE_LINUX_FALLOC_H
@@ -2425,13 +2427,131 @@ out_error:
errno = -ret;
return -1;
}
+#endif
+
+#ifdef URING
+struct io_uring ring;
+#define URING_ENTRIES 1024
+int
+uring_setup()
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = io_uring_queue_init(URING_ENTRIES, &ring, 0);
+ if (ret != 0) {
+ fprintf(stderr, "uring_setup: io_uring_queue_init failed: %s\n",
+ strerror(ret));
+ return -1;
+ }
+ return 0;
+}
-int aio_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
+int
+__uring_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
{
+ struct io_uring_sqe *sqe;
+ struct io_uring_cqe *cqe;
+ struct iovec iovec;
int ret;
+ int res, res2 = 0;
+ char *p = buf;
+ unsigned l = len;
+ unsigned o = offset;
+
+
+ /*
+ * Due to io_uring tries non-blocking IOs (especially read), that
+ * always cause 'normal' short reading. To avoid this short read
+ * fail, try to loop read/write (escpecilly read) data.
+ */
+ uring_loop:
+ sqe = io_uring_get_sqe(&ring);
+ if (!sqe) {
+ fprintf(stderr, "uring_rw: io_uring_get_sqe failed: %s\n",
+ strerror(errno));
+ return -1;
+ }
+
+ iovec.iov_base = p;
+ iovec.iov_len = l;
+ if (rw == READ) {
+ io_uring_prep_readv(sqe, fd, &iovec, 1, o);
+ } else {
+ io_uring_prep_writev(sqe, fd, &iovec, 1, o);
+ }
+
+ ret = io_uring_submit_and_wait(&ring, 1);
+ if (ret != 1) {
+ fprintf(stderr, "errcode=%d\n", -ret);
+ fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: io_uring_submit failed: %s\n",
+ rw == READ ? "read":"write", strerror(-ret));
+ goto uring_error;
+ }
+
+ ret = io_uring_wait_cqe(&ring, &cqe);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ if (ret == 0)
+ fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: no events available\n",
+ rw == READ ? "read":"write");
+ else {
+ fprintf(stderr, "errcode=%d\n", -ret);
+ fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: io_uring_wait_cqe failed: %s\n",
+ rw == READ ? "read":"write", strerror(-ret));
+ }
+ goto uring_error;
+ }
+ res = cqe->res;
+ io_uring_cqe_seen(&ring, cqe);
+
+ res2 += res;
+ if (len != res2) {
+ if (res > 0) {
+ o += res;
+ l -= res;
+ p += res;
+ if (l > 0)
+ goto uring_loop;
+ } else if (res < 0) {
+ ret = res;
+ fprintf(stderr, "errcode=%d\n", -ret);
+ fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: io_uring failed: %s\n",
+ rw == READ ? "read":"write", strerror(-ret));
+ goto uring_error;
+ } else {
+ fprintf(stderr, "uring %s bad io length: %d instead of %u\n",
+ rw == READ ? "read":"write", res2, len);
+ }
+ }
+ return res2;
+
+ uring_error:
+ /*
+ * The caller expects error return in traditional libc
+ * convention, i.e. -1 and the errno set to error.
+ */
+ errno = -ret;
+ return -1;
+}
+#endif
+
+int fsx_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
+{
+ int ret = -1;
if (aio) {
+#ifdef AIO
ret = __aio_rw(rw, fd, buf, len, offset);
+#elif
+ fprintf(stderr, "io_rw: need AIO support!\n");
+ exit(111);
+#endif
+ } else if (uring) {
+#ifdef URING
+ ret = __uring_rw(rw, fd, buf, len, offset);
+#elif
+ fprintf(stderr, "io_rw: need IO_URING support!\n");
+ exit(111);
+#endif
} else {
if (rw == READ)
ret = read(fd, buf, len);
@@ -2441,8 +2561,6 @@ int aio_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
return ret;
}
-#endif
-
#define test_fallocate(mode) __test_fallocate(mode, #mode)
int
@@ -2496,7 +2614,7 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
setvbuf(stdout, (char *)0, _IOLBF, 0); /* line buffered stdout */
while ((ch = getopt_long(argc, argv,
- "b:c:dfg:i:j:kl:m:no:p:qr:s:t:w:xyABD:EFJKHzCILN:OP:RS:WXZ",
+ "b:c:dfg:i:j:kl:m:no:p:qr:s:t:w:xyABD:EFJKHzCILN:OP:RS:UWXZ",
longopts, NULL)) != EOF)
switch (ch) {
case 'b':
@@ -2604,6 +2722,9 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
case 'A':
aio = 1;
break;
+ case 'U':
+ uring = 1;
+ break;
case 'D':
debugstart = getnum(optarg, &endp);
if (debugstart < 1)
@@ -2694,6 +2815,11 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
if (argc != 1)
usage();
+ if (aio && uring) {
+ fprintf(stderr, "-A and -U shouldn't be used together\n");
+ usage();
+ }
+
if (integrity && !dirpath) {
fprintf(stderr, "option -i <logdev> requires -P <dirpath>\n");
usage();
@@ -2784,6 +2910,10 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
if (aio)
aio_setup();
#endif
+#ifdef URING
+ if (uring)
+ uring_setup();
+#endif
if (!(o_flags & O_TRUNC)) {
off_t ret;
--
2.20.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fsx: add IO_URING test
2020-08-23 6:30 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] fsx: add IO_URING test Zorro Lang
@ 2020-09-03 12:44 ` Brian Foster
2020-09-06 15:55 ` Zorro Lang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Brian Foster @ 2020-09-03 12:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zorro Lang; +Cc: fstests, axboe, io-uring
On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 02:30:32PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> New IO_URING test for fsx, use -U option to enable IO_URING test.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <[email protected]>
> ---
Note that this one doesn't compile if one of the ifdefs doesn't evaluate
true:
fsx.c:2551:6: error: #elif with no expression
2551 | #elif
| ^
[CC] fsx
fsx.c: In function 'fsx_rw':
fsx.c:2551:6: error: #elif with no expression
2551 | #elif
| ^
gmake[2]: *** [Makefile:52: fsx] Error 1
gmake[1]: *** [include/buildrules:30: ltp] Error 2
make: *** [Makefile:53: default] Error 2
I suspect you want to replace both of those with #else. Otherwise mostly
some aesthetic comments...
> ltp/fsx.c | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 144 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/ltp/fsx.c b/ltp/fsx.c
> index 7c76655a..05663528 100644
> --- a/ltp/fsx.c
> +++ b/ltp/fsx.c
...
> @@ -176,21 +179,17 @@ int integrity = 0; /* -i flag */
> int fsxgoodfd = 0;
> int o_direct; /* -Z */
> int aio = 0;
> +int uring = 0;
> int mark_nr = 0;
>
> int page_size;
> int page_mask;
> int mmap_mask;
> -#ifdef AIO
> -int aio_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset);
> +int fsx_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset);
> #define READ 0
> #define WRITE 1
> -#define fsxread(a,b,c,d) aio_rw(READ, a,b,c,d)
> -#define fsxwrite(a,b,c,d) aio_rw(WRITE, a,b,c,d)
> -#else
> -#define fsxread(a,b,c,d) read(a,b,c)
> -#define fsxwrite(a,b,c,d) write(a,b,c)
> -#endif
> +#define fsxread(a,b,c,d) fsx_rw(READ, a,b,c,d)
> +#define fsxwrite(a,b,c,d) fsx_rw(WRITE, a,b,c,d)
>
Could we do the refactoring that introduces fsx_rw and shuffles around
some of the existing AIO in an initial refactoring patch?
> const char *replayops = NULL;
> const char *recordops = NULL;
...
> @@ -2425,13 +2427,131 @@ out_error:
> errno = -ret;
> return -1;
> }
> +#endif
> +
> +#ifdef URING
A whitespace line here...
> +struct io_uring ring;
> +#define URING_ENTRIES 1024
... and here would help readability.
> +int
> +uring_setup()
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = io_uring_queue_init(URING_ENTRIES, &ring, 0);
> + if (ret != 0) {
> + fprintf(stderr, "uring_setup: io_uring_queue_init failed: %s\n",
> + strerror(ret));
> + return -1;
> + }
> + return 0;
Looks like some whitespace damage here.
Also, the fsstress patch has a io_uring_queue_exit() call but I don't
see one in this patch. Is that not needed?
> +}
>
> -int aio_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
> +int
> +__uring_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
Do we still need the __ in the function names here and for __aio_rw()?
> {
> + struct io_uring_sqe *sqe;
> + struct io_uring_cqe *cqe;
> + struct iovec iovec;
> int ret;
> + int res, res2 = 0;
> + char *p = buf;
> + unsigned l = len;
> + unsigned o = offset;
> +
> +
> + /*
> + * Due to io_uring tries non-blocking IOs (especially read), that
> + * always cause 'normal' short reading. To avoid this short read
> + * fail, try to loop read/write (escpecilly read) data.
> + */
> + uring_loop:
> + sqe = io_uring_get_sqe(&ring);
> + if (!sqe) {
> + fprintf(stderr, "uring_rw: io_uring_get_sqe failed: %s\n",
> + strerror(errno));
> + return -1;
> + }
> +
> + iovec.iov_base = p;
> + iovec.iov_len = l;
> + if (rw == READ) {
> + io_uring_prep_readv(sqe, fd, &iovec, 1, o);
> + } else {
> + io_uring_prep_writev(sqe, fd, &iovec, 1, o);
> + }
> +
> + ret = io_uring_submit_and_wait(&ring, 1);
> + if (ret != 1) {
> + fprintf(stderr, "errcode=%d\n", -ret);
> + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: io_uring_submit failed: %s\n",
> + rw == READ ? "read":"write", strerror(-ret));
> + goto uring_error;
> + }
> +
> + ret = io_uring_wait_cqe(&ring, &cqe);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + if (ret == 0)
That doesn't look right since we only get here if ret < 0.
> + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: no events available\n",
> + rw == READ ? "read":"write");
> + else {
> + fprintf(stderr, "errcode=%d\n", -ret);
> + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: io_uring_wait_cqe failed: %s\n",
> + rw == READ ? "read":"write", strerror(-ret));
> + }
> + goto uring_error;
> + }
> + res = cqe->res;
> + io_uring_cqe_seen(&ring, cqe);
> +
> + res2 += res;
> + if (len != res2) {
> + if (res > 0) {
> + o += res;
> + l -= res;
> + p += res;
> + if (l > 0)
> + goto uring_loop;
> + } else if (res < 0) {
> + ret = res;
> + fprintf(stderr, "errcode=%d\n", -ret);
> + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: io_uring failed: %s\n",
> + rw == READ ? "read":"write", strerror(-ret));
> + goto uring_error;
Can we elevate the error checks into the top level rather than nesting
logic like this? It's a little confusing to read and it looks
particularly odd since we've already done res2 += res before we get
here.
Also I'm wondering if this whole function would read a little better as
a do {} while() loop rather than using a label and goto.
> + } else {
> + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s bad io length: %d instead of %u\n",
> + rw == READ ? "read":"write", res2, len);
> + }
> + }
> + return res2;
> +
> + uring_error:
> + /*
> + * The caller expects error return in traditional libc
> + * convention, i.e. -1 and the errno set to error.
> + */
> + errno = -ret;
> + return -1;
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> +int fsx_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
> +{
> + int ret = -1;
>
> if (aio) {
> +#ifdef AIO
> ret = __aio_rw(rw, fd, buf, len, offset);
> +#elif
> + fprintf(stderr, "io_rw: need AIO support!\n");
> + exit(111);
> +#endif
> + } else if (uring) {
> +#ifdef URING
> + ret = __uring_rw(rw, fd, buf, len, offset);
> +#elif
> + fprintf(stderr, "io_rw: need IO_URING support!\n");
> + exit(111);
> +#endif
I think the ifdefs would be cleaner if used to define stubbed out
variants of the associated functions. E.g.:
#ifdef URING
int
__uring_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
{
<do uring I/O>
}
#else
int
__uring_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
{
fprintf(stderr, "io_rw: need IO_URING support!\n");
exit(111);
}
#endif
Brian
> } else {
> if (rw == READ)
> ret = read(fd, buf, len);
> @@ -2441,8 +2561,6 @@ int aio_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
> return ret;
> }
>
> -#endif
> -
> #define test_fallocate(mode) __test_fallocate(mode, #mode)
>
> int
> @@ -2496,7 +2614,7 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> setvbuf(stdout, (char *)0, _IOLBF, 0); /* line buffered stdout */
>
> while ((ch = getopt_long(argc, argv,
> - "b:c:dfg:i:j:kl:m:no:p:qr:s:t:w:xyABD:EFJKHzCILN:OP:RS:WXZ",
> + "b:c:dfg:i:j:kl:m:no:p:qr:s:t:w:xyABD:EFJKHzCILN:OP:RS:UWXZ",
> longopts, NULL)) != EOF)
> switch (ch) {
> case 'b':
> @@ -2604,6 +2722,9 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> case 'A':
> aio = 1;
> break;
> + case 'U':
> + uring = 1;
> + break;
> case 'D':
> debugstart = getnum(optarg, &endp);
> if (debugstart < 1)
> @@ -2694,6 +2815,11 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> if (argc != 1)
> usage();
>
> + if (aio && uring) {
> + fprintf(stderr, "-A and -U shouldn't be used together\n");
> + usage();
> + }
> +
> if (integrity && !dirpath) {
> fprintf(stderr, "option -i <logdev> requires -P <dirpath>\n");
> usage();
> @@ -2784,6 +2910,10 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> if (aio)
> aio_setup();
> #endif
> +#ifdef URING
> + if (uring)
> + uring_setup();
> +#endif
>
> if (!(o_flags & O_TRUNC)) {
> off_t ret;
> --
> 2.20.1
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fsx: add IO_URING test
2020-09-03 12:44 ` Brian Foster
@ 2020-09-06 15:55 ` Zorro Lang
2020-09-06 16:27 ` Zorro Lang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Zorro Lang @ 2020-09-06 15:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Brian Foster; +Cc: fstests, axboe, io-uring
On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 08:44:13AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 02:30:32PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> > New IO_URING test for fsx, use -U option to enable IO_URING test.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <[email protected]>
> > ---
>
> Note that this one doesn't compile if one of the ifdefs doesn't evaluate
> true:
>
> fsx.c:2551:6: error: #elif with no expression
> 2551 | #elif
> | ^
> [CC] fsx
> fsx.c: In function 'fsx_rw':
> fsx.c:2551:6: error: #elif with no expression
> 2551 | #elif
> | ^
> gmake[2]: *** [Makefile:52: fsx] Error 1
> gmake[1]: *** [include/buildrules:30: ltp] Error 2
> make: *** [Makefile:53: default] Error 2
>
> I suspect you want to replace both of those with #else. Otherwise mostly
> some aesthetic comments...
Sorry, that's truely a mistake, I'll fix it :)
>
> > ltp/fsx.c | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 144 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/ltp/fsx.c b/ltp/fsx.c
> > index 7c76655a..05663528 100644
> > --- a/ltp/fsx.c
> > +++ b/ltp/fsx.c
> ...
> > @@ -176,21 +179,17 @@ int integrity = 0; /* -i flag */
> > int fsxgoodfd = 0;
> > int o_direct; /* -Z */
> > int aio = 0;
> > +int uring = 0;
> > int mark_nr = 0;
> >
> > int page_size;
> > int page_mask;
> > int mmap_mask;
> > -#ifdef AIO
> > -int aio_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset);
> > +int fsx_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset);
> > #define READ 0
> > #define WRITE 1
> > -#define fsxread(a,b,c,d) aio_rw(READ, a,b,c,d)
> > -#define fsxwrite(a,b,c,d) aio_rw(WRITE, a,b,c,d)
> > -#else
> > -#define fsxread(a,b,c,d) read(a,b,c)
> > -#define fsxwrite(a,b,c,d) write(a,b,c)
> > -#endif
> > +#define fsxread(a,b,c,d) fsx_rw(READ, a,b,c,d)
> > +#define fsxwrite(a,b,c,d) fsx_rw(WRITE, a,b,c,d)
> >
>
> Could we do the refactoring that introduces fsx_rw and shuffles around
> some of the existing AIO in an initial refactoring patch?
May I save this pre-patch, if you don't insist on that :-P
>
> > const char *replayops = NULL;
> > const char *recordops = NULL;
> ...
> > @@ -2425,13 +2427,131 @@ out_error:
> > errno = -ret;
> > return -1;
> > }
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +#ifdef URING
>
> A whitespace line here...
>
> > +struct io_uring ring;
> > +#define URING_ENTRIES 1024
>
> ... and here would help readability.
>
> > +int
> > +uring_setup()
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + ret = io_uring_queue_init(URING_ENTRIES, &ring, 0);
> > + if (ret != 0) {
> > + fprintf(stderr, "uring_setup: io_uring_queue_init failed: %s\n",
> > + strerror(ret));
> > + return -1;
> > + }
> > + return 0;
>
> Looks like some whitespace damage here.
>
> Also, the fsstress patch has a io_uring_queue_exit() call but I don't
> see one in this patch. Is that not needed?
There's not aio_destroy() either. I think due to fsstress is a multi-process
test, so it'd like to destroy io_uring or aio at each process end. But fsx is
a pure single process test, the io_uring or aio will destroyed when fsx exit.
I can add io_uring_queue_exit() and aio_destroy() if you think it would be
better.
>
> > +}
> >
> > -int aio_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
> > +int
> > +__uring_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
>
> Do we still need the __ in the function names here and for __aio_rw()?
I don't think it's needed. I use the "__" just due to the old __aio_rw() has. I
can remove both "__" of __aio_rw and __uring_rw.
>
> > {
> > + struct io_uring_sqe *sqe;
> > + struct io_uring_cqe *cqe;
> > + struct iovec iovec;
> > int ret;
> > + int res, res2 = 0;
> > + char *p = buf;
> > + unsigned l = len;
> > + unsigned o = offset;
> > +
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Due to io_uring tries non-blocking IOs (especially read), that
> > + * always cause 'normal' short reading. To avoid this short read
> > + * fail, try to loop read/write (escpecilly read) data.
> > + */
> > + uring_loop:
> > + sqe = io_uring_get_sqe(&ring);
> > + if (!sqe) {
> > + fprintf(stderr, "uring_rw: io_uring_get_sqe failed: %s\n",
> > + strerror(errno));
> > + return -1;
> > + }
> > +
> > + iovec.iov_base = p;
> > + iovec.iov_len = l;
> > + if (rw == READ) {
> > + io_uring_prep_readv(sqe, fd, &iovec, 1, o);
> > + } else {
> > + io_uring_prep_writev(sqe, fd, &iovec, 1, o);
> > + }
> > +
> > + ret = io_uring_submit_and_wait(&ring, 1);
> > + if (ret != 1) {
> > + fprintf(stderr, "errcode=%d\n", -ret);
> > + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: io_uring_submit failed: %s\n",
> > + rw == READ ? "read":"write", strerror(-ret));
> > + goto uring_error;
> > + }
> > +
> > + ret = io_uring_wait_cqe(&ring, &cqe);
> > + if (ret < 0) {
> > + if (ret == 0)
>
> That doesn't look right since we only get here if ret < 0.
Thanks, it should be (ret <= 0)
>
> > + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: no events available\n",
> > + rw == READ ? "read":"write");
> > + else {
> > + fprintf(stderr, "errcode=%d\n", -ret);
> > + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: io_uring_wait_cqe failed: %s\n",
> > + rw == READ ? "read":"write", strerror(-ret));
> > + }
> > + goto uring_error;
> > + }
> > + res = cqe->res;
> > + io_uring_cqe_seen(&ring, cqe);
> > +
> > + res2 += res;
> > + if (len != res2) {
> > + if (res > 0) {
> > + o += res;
> > + l -= res;
> > + p += res;
> > + if (l > 0)
> > + goto uring_loop;
> > + } else if (res < 0) {
> > + ret = res;
> > + fprintf(stderr, "errcode=%d\n", -ret);
> > + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: io_uring failed: %s\n",
> > + rw == READ ? "read":"write", strerror(-ret));
> > + goto uring_error;
>
> Can we elevate the error checks into the top level rather than nesting
> logic like this? It's a little confusing to read and it looks
> particularly odd since we've already done res2 += res before we get
> here.
>
> Also I'm wondering if this whole function would read a little better as
> a do {} while() loop rather than using a label and goto.
Sure, I'll try to change that.
>
> > + } else {
> > + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s bad io length: %d instead of %u\n",
> > + rw == READ ? "read":"write", res2, len);
> > + }
> > + }
> > + return res2;
> > +
> > + uring_error:
> > + /*
> > + * The caller expects error return in traditional libc
> > + * convention, i.e. -1 and the errno set to error.
> > + */
> > + errno = -ret;
> > + return -1;
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +int fsx_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
> > +{
> > + int ret = -1;
> >
> > if (aio) {
> > +#ifdef AIO
> > ret = __aio_rw(rw, fd, buf, len, offset);
> > +#elif
> > + fprintf(stderr, "io_rw: need AIO support!\n");
> > + exit(111);
> > +#endif
> > + } else if (uring) {
> > +#ifdef URING
> > + ret = __uring_rw(rw, fd, buf, len, offset);
> > +#elif
> > + fprintf(stderr, "io_rw: need IO_URING support!\n");
> > + exit(111);
> > +#endif
>
> I think the ifdefs would be cleaner if used to define stubbed out
> variants of the associated functions. E.g.:
>
> #ifdef URING
> int
> __uring_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
> {
> <do uring I/O>
> }
> #else
> int
> __uring_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
> {
> fprintf(stderr, "io_rw: need IO_URING support!\n");
> exit(111);
> }
> #endif
Sure, will do that.
Thanks for your review, Brian!
Zorro
>
> Brian
>
> > } else {
> > if (rw == READ)
> > ret = read(fd, buf, len);
> > @@ -2441,8 +2561,6 @@ int aio_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > -#endif
> > -
> > #define test_fallocate(mode) __test_fallocate(mode, #mode)
> >
> > int
> > @@ -2496,7 +2614,7 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> > setvbuf(stdout, (char *)0, _IOLBF, 0); /* line buffered stdout */
> >
> > while ((ch = getopt_long(argc, argv,
> > - "b:c:dfg:i:j:kl:m:no:p:qr:s:t:w:xyABD:EFJKHzCILN:OP:RS:WXZ",
> > + "b:c:dfg:i:j:kl:m:no:p:qr:s:t:w:xyABD:EFJKHzCILN:OP:RS:UWXZ",
> > longopts, NULL)) != EOF)
> > switch (ch) {
> > case 'b':
> > @@ -2604,6 +2722,9 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> > case 'A':
> > aio = 1;
> > break;
> > + case 'U':
> > + uring = 1;
> > + break;
> > case 'D':
> > debugstart = getnum(optarg, &endp);
> > if (debugstart < 1)
> > @@ -2694,6 +2815,11 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> > if (argc != 1)
> > usage();
> >
> > + if (aio && uring) {
> > + fprintf(stderr, "-A and -U shouldn't be used together\n");
> > + usage();
> > + }
> > +
> > if (integrity && !dirpath) {
> > fprintf(stderr, "option -i <logdev> requires -P <dirpath>\n");
> > usage();
> > @@ -2784,6 +2910,10 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> > if (aio)
> > aio_setup();
> > #endif
> > +#ifdef URING
> > + if (uring)
> > + uring_setup();
> > +#endif
> >
> > if (!(o_flags & O_TRUNC)) {
> > off_t ret;
> > --
> > 2.20.1
> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fsx: add IO_URING test
2020-09-06 15:55 ` Zorro Lang
@ 2020-09-06 16:27 ` Zorro Lang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Zorro Lang @ 2020-09-06 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Brian Foster, fstests, axboe, io-uring
On Sun, Sep 06, 2020 at 11:55:16PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 08:44:13AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 02:30:32PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> > > New IO_URING test for fsx, use -U option to enable IO_URING test.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> >
> > Note that this one doesn't compile if one of the ifdefs doesn't evaluate
> > true:
> >
> > fsx.c:2551:6: error: #elif with no expression
> > 2551 | #elif
> > | ^
> > [CC] fsx
> > fsx.c: In function 'fsx_rw':
> > fsx.c:2551:6: error: #elif with no expression
> > 2551 | #elif
> > | ^
> > gmake[2]: *** [Makefile:52: fsx] Error 1
> > gmake[1]: *** [include/buildrules:30: ltp] Error 2
> > make: *** [Makefile:53: default] Error 2
> >
> > I suspect you want to replace both of those with #else. Otherwise mostly
> > some aesthetic comments...
>
> Sorry, that's truely a mistake, I'll fix it :)
>
> >
> > > ltp/fsx.c | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > > 1 file changed, 144 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/ltp/fsx.c b/ltp/fsx.c
> > > index 7c76655a..05663528 100644
> > > --- a/ltp/fsx.c
> > > +++ b/ltp/fsx.c
> > ...
> > > @@ -176,21 +179,17 @@ int integrity = 0; /* -i flag */
> > > int fsxgoodfd = 0;
> > > int o_direct; /* -Z */
> > > int aio = 0;
> > > +int uring = 0;
> > > int mark_nr = 0;
> > >
> > > int page_size;
> > > int page_mask;
> > > int mmap_mask;
> > > -#ifdef AIO
> > > -int aio_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset);
> > > +int fsx_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset);
> > > #define READ 0
> > > #define WRITE 1
> > > -#define fsxread(a,b,c,d) aio_rw(READ, a,b,c,d)
> > > -#define fsxwrite(a,b,c,d) aio_rw(WRITE, a,b,c,d)
> > > -#else
> > > -#define fsxread(a,b,c,d) read(a,b,c)
> > > -#define fsxwrite(a,b,c,d) write(a,b,c)
> > > -#endif
> > > +#define fsxread(a,b,c,d) fsx_rw(READ, a,b,c,d)
> > > +#define fsxwrite(a,b,c,d) fsx_rw(WRITE, a,b,c,d)
> > >
> >
> > Could we do the refactoring that introduces fsx_rw and shuffles around
> > some of the existing AIO in an initial refactoring patch?
>
> May I save this pre-patch, if you don't insist on that :-P
>
> >
> > > const char *replayops = NULL;
> > > const char *recordops = NULL;
> > ...
> > > @@ -2425,13 +2427,131 @@ out_error:
> > > errno = -ret;
> > > return -1;
> > > }
> > > +#endif
> > > +
> > > +#ifdef URING
> >
> > A whitespace line here...
> >
> > > +struct io_uring ring;
> > > +#define URING_ENTRIES 1024
> >
> > ... and here would help readability.
> >
> > > +int
> > > +uring_setup()
> > > +{
> > > + int ret;
> > > +
> > > + ret = io_uring_queue_init(URING_ENTRIES, &ring, 0);
> > > + if (ret != 0) {
> > > + fprintf(stderr, "uring_setup: io_uring_queue_init failed: %s\n",
> > > + strerror(ret));
> > > + return -1;
> > > + }
> > > + return 0;
> >
> > Looks like some whitespace damage here.
> >
> > Also, the fsstress patch has a io_uring_queue_exit() call but I don't
> > see one in this patch. Is that not needed?
>
> There's not aio_destroy() either. I think due to fsstress is a multi-process
> test, so it'd like to destroy io_uring or aio at each process end. But fsx is
> a pure single process test, the io_uring or aio will destroyed when fsx exit.
> I can add io_uring_queue_exit() and aio_destroy() if you think it would be
> better.
>
> >
> > > +}
> > >
> > > -int aio_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
> > > +int
> > > +__uring_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
> >
> > Do we still need the __ in the function names here and for __aio_rw()?
>
> I don't think it's needed. I use the "__" just due to the old __aio_rw() has. I
> can remove both "__" of __aio_rw and __uring_rw.
>
> >
> > > {
> > > + struct io_uring_sqe *sqe;
> > > + struct io_uring_cqe *cqe;
> > > + struct iovec iovec;
> > > int ret;
> > > + int res, res2 = 0;
> > > + char *p = buf;
> > > + unsigned l = len;
> > > + unsigned o = offset;
> > > +
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * Due to io_uring tries non-blocking IOs (especially read), that
> > > + * always cause 'normal' short reading. To avoid this short read
> > > + * fail, try to loop read/write (escpecilly read) data.
> > > + */
> > > + uring_loop:
> > > + sqe = io_uring_get_sqe(&ring);
> > > + if (!sqe) {
> > > + fprintf(stderr, "uring_rw: io_uring_get_sqe failed: %s\n",
> > > + strerror(errno));
> > > + return -1;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + iovec.iov_base = p;
> > > + iovec.iov_len = l;
> > > + if (rw == READ) {
> > > + io_uring_prep_readv(sqe, fd, &iovec, 1, o);
> > > + } else {
> > > + io_uring_prep_writev(sqe, fd, &iovec, 1, o);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + ret = io_uring_submit_and_wait(&ring, 1);
> > > + if (ret != 1) {
> > > + fprintf(stderr, "errcode=%d\n", -ret);
> > > + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: io_uring_submit failed: %s\n",
> > > + rw == READ ? "read":"write", strerror(-ret));
> > > + goto uring_error;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + ret = io_uring_wait_cqe(&ring, &cqe);
> > > + if (ret < 0) {
> > > + if (ret == 0)
> >
> > That doesn't look right since we only get here if ret < 0.
>
> Thanks, it should be (ret <= 0)
Sorry, I just checked io_uring_wait_cqe() code, it returns 0 on success.
So my "if (ret == 0)" checking is totally wrong, I'll remove it :)
/*
* Return an IO completion, waiting for it if necessary. Returns 0 with
* cqe_ptr filled in on success, -errno on failure.
*/
static inline int io_uring_wait_cqe(struct io_uring *ring,
struct io_uring_cqe **cqe_ptr)
>
> >
> > > + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: no events available\n",
> > > + rw == READ ? "read":"write");
> > > + else {
> > > + fprintf(stderr, "errcode=%d\n", -ret);
> > > + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: io_uring_wait_cqe failed: %s\n",
> > > + rw == READ ? "read":"write", strerror(-ret));
> > > + }
> > > + goto uring_error;
> > > + }
> > > + res = cqe->res;
> > > + io_uring_cqe_seen(&ring, cqe);
> > > +
> > > + res2 += res;
> > > + if (len != res2) {
> > > + if (res > 0) {
> > > + o += res;
> > > + l -= res;
> > > + p += res;
> > > + if (l > 0)
> > > + goto uring_loop;
> > > + } else if (res < 0) {
> > > + ret = res;
> > > + fprintf(stderr, "errcode=%d\n", -ret);
> > > + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s: io_uring failed: %s\n",
> > > + rw == READ ? "read":"write", strerror(-ret));
> > > + goto uring_error;
> >
> > Can we elevate the error checks into the top level rather than nesting
> > logic like this? It's a little confusing to read and it looks
> > particularly odd since we've already done res2 += res before we get
> > here.
> >
> > Also I'm wondering if this whole function would read a little better as
> > a do {} while() loop rather than using a label and goto.
>
> Sure, I'll try to change that.
>
> >
> > > + } else {
> > > + fprintf(stderr, "uring %s bad io length: %d instead of %u\n",
> > > + rw == READ ? "read":"write", res2, len);
> > > + }
> > > + }
> > > + return res2;
> > > +
> > > + uring_error:
> > > + /*
> > > + * The caller expects error return in traditional libc
> > > + * convention, i.e. -1 and the errno set to error.
> > > + */
> > > + errno = -ret;
> > > + return -1;
> > > +}
> > > +#endif
> > > +
> > > +int fsx_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
> > > +{
> > > + int ret = -1;
> > >
> > > if (aio) {
> > > +#ifdef AIO
> > > ret = __aio_rw(rw, fd, buf, len, offset);
> > > +#elif
> > > + fprintf(stderr, "io_rw: need AIO support!\n");
> > > + exit(111);
> > > +#endif
> > > + } else if (uring) {
> > > +#ifdef URING
> > > + ret = __uring_rw(rw, fd, buf, len, offset);
> > > +#elif
> > > + fprintf(stderr, "io_rw: need IO_URING support!\n");
> > > + exit(111);
> > > +#endif
> >
> > I think the ifdefs would be cleaner if used to define stubbed out
> > variants of the associated functions. E.g.:
> >
> > #ifdef URING
> > int
> > __uring_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
> > {
> > <do uring I/O>
> > }
> > #else
> > int
> > __uring_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
> > {
> > fprintf(stderr, "io_rw: need IO_URING support!\n");
> > exit(111);
> > }
> > #endif
>
> Sure, will do that.
>
> Thanks for your review, Brian!
> Zorro
>
> >
> > Brian
> >
> > > } else {
> > > if (rw == READ)
> > > ret = read(fd, buf, len);
> > > @@ -2441,8 +2561,6 @@ int aio_rw(int rw, int fd, char *buf, unsigned len, unsigned offset)
> > > return ret;
> > > }
> > >
> > > -#endif
> > > -
> > > #define test_fallocate(mode) __test_fallocate(mode, #mode)
> > >
> > > int
> > > @@ -2496,7 +2614,7 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> > > setvbuf(stdout, (char *)0, _IOLBF, 0); /* line buffered stdout */
> > >
> > > while ((ch = getopt_long(argc, argv,
> > > - "b:c:dfg:i:j:kl:m:no:p:qr:s:t:w:xyABD:EFJKHzCILN:OP:RS:WXZ",
> > > + "b:c:dfg:i:j:kl:m:no:p:qr:s:t:w:xyABD:EFJKHzCILN:OP:RS:UWXZ",
> > > longopts, NULL)) != EOF)
> > > switch (ch) {
> > > case 'b':
> > > @@ -2604,6 +2722,9 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> > > case 'A':
> > > aio = 1;
> > > break;
> > > + case 'U':
> > > + uring = 1;
> > > + break;
> > > case 'D':
> > > debugstart = getnum(optarg, &endp);
> > > if (debugstart < 1)
> > > @@ -2694,6 +2815,11 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> > > if (argc != 1)
> > > usage();
> > >
> > > + if (aio && uring) {
> > > + fprintf(stderr, "-A and -U shouldn't be used together\n");
> > > + usage();
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > if (integrity && !dirpath) {
> > > fprintf(stderr, "option -i <logdev> requires -P <dirpath>\n");
> > > usage();
> > > @@ -2784,6 +2910,10 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> > > if (aio)
> > > aio_setup();
> > > #endif
> > > +#ifdef URING
> > > + if (uring)
> > > + uring_setup();
> > > +#endif
> > >
> > > if (!(o_flags & O_TRUNC)) {
> > > off_t ret;
> > > --
> > > 2.20.1
> > >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread