fsstress,fsx: add io_uring test and do some fix
v3 cover fsstress,fsx: add io_uring test and do some fix
This patchset tries to add new IO_URING test into fsstress [1/4] and fsx [4/4]. And then do some changes and bug fix by the way [2/4 and 3/4].
fsstress and fsx are important tools in xfstests to do filesystem I/Os test, lots of test cases use it. So add IO_URING operation into fsstress and fsx will help to cover IO_URING test from fs side.
I'm not an IO_URING expert, so cc io-uring@ list, please feel free to tell me if you find something wrong or have any suggestions to improve the test.
V2 did below changes:
1) 1/4 change the definition of URING_ENTRIES to 1
2) 2/4 change the difinition of AIO_ENTRIES to 1, undo an unrelated changed line
3) 4/4 turn to use io_uring_prep_readv/io_uring_prep_writev, due to old liburing(0.2-2) doesn't support io_uring_prep_read/io_uring_prep_write.
V3 changed io_uring_submit(&ring) to io_uring_submit_and_wait(&ring, 1). I'm not sure if this's the real mean of Jens Axboe's review point, please check.
https://marc.info/?l=fstests&m=159811932808057&w=2
Thanks,
Zorro
PATCH v3 1/4 fsstress: add IO_URING read and write operations
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.
--- 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
README +2 -2
@@ -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
configure.ac +1 -0
@@ -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
include/builddefs.in +1 -0
@@ -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@
ltp/Makefile +5 -0
@@ -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
ltp/fsstress.c +138 -1
187 lines not on this page · raw message
m4/Makefile +1 -0
@@ -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 \
m4/package_liburing.m4 new file +4 -0
@@ -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) + ])
Signature · 1 line
2.20.1
Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] fsstress: add IO_URING read and write operations
Quoted 15 lines · Zorro Lang
IO_URINGis a new feature of curent linux kernel, add basicIO_URINGread/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
...
Quoted 4 lines
ltp/fsstress.c +0
-0
...
Quoted 48 lines
ltp/fsstress.c +44
-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,
ltp/fsstress.c do_aio_rw(int opno, long r, int flags) · line 2245
Quoted 10 lines
ltp/fsstress.c +10
-0+ 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?
Quoted 35 lines
ltp/fsstress.c +35
-0+ 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",
ltp/fsstress.c do_aio_rw(int opno, long r, int flags) · line 2290
Quoted 10 lines
ltp/fsstress.c +10
-0+ 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
Quoted 54 lines
ltp/fsstress.c +19
-0+} +#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) {m4/Makefile +1
-0@@ -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 \m4/package_liburing.m4 new file +4
-0@@ -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) + ])Signature · 1 line
2.20.1
Jens Axboe
maintainerRe: [PATCH v3 1/4] fsstress: add IO_URING read and write operations
Quoted 75 lines · Brian Foster
Quoted 15 lines · Zorro Lang
IO_URINGis a new feature of curent linux kernel, add basicIO_URINGread/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...
Quoted 4 lines
ltp/fsstress.c +0
-0...
Quoted 53 lines
ltp/fsstress.c +49
-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) {
Quoted 8 lines
ltp/fsstress.c do_aio_rw(int opno, long r, int flags) · line 2245
Quoted 5 lines
ltp/fsstress.c +5
-0+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_uringbits, 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.
Signature · 1 line
Jens Axboe
PATCH v3 2/4 fsstress: reduce the number of events when io_setup
In reply to Zorro LangThe 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.
--- ltp/fsstress.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
ltp/fsstress.c +3 -2
@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@#endif #ifdef AIO #include <libaio.h> +#define AIO_ENTRIES 1io_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
Signature · 1 line
2.20.1
Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] fsstress: reduce the number of events when io_setup
Quoted 9 lines · Zorro Lang
The original number(128) of aio events for
io_setuptoo big. When try to run lots of fsstress processes(e.g. -p 1000) always hitio_setupEAGAIN error, due to thenr_eventsexceeds 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]>---
Quoted 29 lines
ltp/fsstress.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)ltp/fsstress.c +3
-2@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@#endif #ifdef AIO #include <libaio.h> +#define AIO_ENTRIES 1io_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 Signature · 1 line
2.20.1
PATCH v3 3/4 fsstress: fix memory leak in do_aio_rw
In reply to Zorro LangIf io_submit or io_getevents fails, the do_aio_rw() won't free the "buf" and cause memory leak.
--- ltp/fsstress.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
ltp/fsstress.c +16 -15
@@ -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
Signature · 1 line
2.20.1
Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] fsstress: fix memory leak in do_aio_rw
Quoted 5 lines · Zorro Lang
If
io_submitorio_geteventsfails, thedo_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
Quoted 87 lines
ltp/fsstress.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)ltp/fsstress.c +16
-15@@ -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 Signature · 1 line
2.20.1
PATCH v3 4/4 fsx: add IO_URING test
In reply to Zorro LangNew IO_URING test for fsx, use -U option to enable IO_URING test.
--- ltp/fsx.c | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 144 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
ltp/fsx.c +144 -14
@@ -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 @@ voidusage (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;
Signature · 1 line
2.20.1
Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fsx: add IO_URING test
Quoted 4 lines · Zorro Lang
New
IO_URINGtest for fsx, use -U option to enableIO_URINGtest.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] fsxfsx.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...
Quoted 7 lines
ltp/fsx.c | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 144 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)ltp/fsx.c +0
-0
...
Quoted 14 lines
ltp/fsx.c +2
-2@@ -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
ltp/fsx.c int integrity = 0; /* -i flag */ · line 193
Quoted 10 lines
ltp/fsx.c +2
-6#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?
Quoted 2 lines
ltp/fsx.c +0
-0const char *replayops =NULL ;const char *recordops =NULL ;
...
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2432
Quoted 7 lines
ltp/fsx.c +3
-0@@ -2425,13 +2427,131 @@ out_error: errno = -ret; return -1; } +#endif + +#ifdef URING
A whitespace line here...
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2434
Quoted 2 lines
ltp/fsx.c +2
-0+struct io_uring ring; +#define URING_ENTRIES 1024
... and here would help readability.
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2446
Quoted 12 lines
ltp/fsx.c +12
-0+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?
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2450
Quoted 5 lines
ltp/fsx.c +3
-1+} -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()?
Quoted 33 lines
ltp/fsx.c +31
-0{ +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 );
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2493
Quoted 10 lines
ltp/fsx.c +10
-0+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.
Quoted 16 lines
ltp/fsx.c +16
-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;
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2519
Quoted 10 lines
ltp/fsx.c +10
-0+ 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.
Quoted 25 lines
ltp/fsx.c +22
-0+ } 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
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2554
Quoted 10 lines
ltp/fsx.c +10
-0+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
Quoted 57 lines
ltp/fsx.c +13
-3}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;Signature · 1 line
2.20.1
Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fsx: add IO_URING test
Quoted 21 lines · Brian Foster
Quoted 4 lines · Zorro Lang
New
IO_URINGtest for fsx, use -U option to enableIO_URINGtest.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] fsxfsx.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
Quoted 2 lines
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 :)
Quoted 28 lines
Quoted 8 lines
ltp/fsx.c | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 144 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)ltp/fsx.c +0
-0...
Quoted 19 lines
ltp/fsx.c +2
-6@@ -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)
Quoted 8 lines
ltp/fsx.c int integrity = 0; /* -i flag */ · line 193
Quoted 5 lines
ltp/fsx.c +2
-2-#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_rwand 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
Quoted 34 lines
Quoted 3 lines
ltp/fsx.c +0
-0const char *replayops =NULL ;const char *recordops =NULL ;...
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2432
Quoted 7 lines
ltp/fsx.c +3
-0@@ -2425,13 +2427,131 @@ out_error: errno = -ret; return -1; } +#endif + +#ifdef URING A whitespace line here...
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2434
Quoted 2 lines
ltp/fsx.c +2
-0+struct io_uring ring; +#define URING_ENTRIES 1024... and here would help readability.
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2446
Quoted 12 lines
ltp/fsx.c +12
-0+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.
Quoted 2 lines
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.
Quoted 8 lines
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2450
Quoted 6 lines
ltp/fsx.c +3
-1+} -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.
Quoted 38 lines
Quoted 38 lines
ltp/fsx.c +35
-0{ +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));
Quoted 8 lines
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2493
Quoted 6 lines
ltp/fsx.c +6
-0+ 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)
Quoted 33 lines
Quoted 17 lines
ltp/fsx.c +16
-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;ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2519
Quoted 10 lines
ltp/fsx.c +10
-0+ 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.
Quoted 2 lines
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.
Quoted 49 lines
Quoted 26 lines
ltp/fsx.c +22
-0+ } 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); +#elifltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2554
Quoted 10 lines
ltp/fsx.c +10
-0+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)
Quoted 5 lines
{ fprintf(stderr, "io_rw: need IO_URING support!\n"); exit(111); }#endif
Sure, will do that.
Thanks for your review, Brian!
Zorro
Quoted 60 lines
Brian
Quoted 57 lines
ltp/fsx.c +13
-3}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;Signature · 1 line
2.20.1
Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fsx: add IO_URING test
Quoted 168 lines · Zorro Lang
Quoted 21 lines · Brian Foster
Quoted 4 lines · Zorro Lang
New
IO_URINGtest for fsx, use -U option to enableIO_URINGtest.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] fsxfsx.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 2Quoted 2 lines
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 :)
Quoted 28 lines
Quoted 8 lines
ltp/fsx.c | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 144 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)ltp/fsx.c +0
-0...
Quoted 19 lines
ltp/fsx.c +2
-6@@ -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)Quoted 8 lines
ltp/fsx.c int integrity = 0; /* -i flag */ · line 193
Quoted 5 lines
ltp/fsx.c +2
-2-#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_rwand 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
Quoted 34 lines
Quoted 3 lines
ltp/fsx.c +0
-0const char *replayops =NULL ;const char *recordops =NULL ;...
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2432
Quoted 7 lines
ltp/fsx.c +3
-0@@ -2425,13 +2427,131 @@ out_error: errno = -ret; return -1; } +#endif + +#ifdef URING A whitespace line here...
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2434
Quoted 2 lines
ltp/fsx.c +2
-0+struct io_uring ring; +#define URING_ENTRIES 1024... and here would help readability.
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2446
Quoted 12 lines
ltp/fsx.c +12
-0+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.
Quoted 2 lines
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 destroyio_uringor aio at each process end. But fsx is a pure single process test, theio_uringor aio will destroyed when fsx exit. I can addio_uring_queue_exit()andaio_destroy()if you think it would be better.Quoted 8 lines
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2450
Quoted 6 lines
ltp/fsx.c +3
-1+} -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_rwand__uring_rw.Quoted 38 lines
Quoted 38 lines
ltp/fsx.c +35
-0{ +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));Quoted 8 lines
ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2493
Quoted 6 lines
ltp/fsx.c +6
-0+ 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.
Quoted 1 line
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)
Quoted 159 lines
Quoted 34 lines
Quoted 18 lines
ltp/fsx.c +16
-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;ltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2519
Quoted 10 lines
ltp/fsx.c +10
-0+ 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.
Quoted 2 lines
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.
Quoted 49 lines
Quoted 26 lines
ltp/fsx.c +22
-0+ } 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); +#elifltp/fsx.c out_error: · line 2554
Quoted 10 lines
ltp/fsx.c +10
-0+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)Quoted 5 lines
{ fprintf(stderr, "io_rw: need IO_URING support!\n"); exit(111); }#endif
Sure, will do that.
Thanks for your review, Brian!
ZorroQuoted 60 lines
Brian
Quoted 57 lines
ltp/fsx.c +13
-3}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;Signature · 1 line
2.20.1
Quoted 17 lines · Zorro Lang
This patchset tries to add new
IO_URINGtest into fsstress [1/4] and fsx [4/4]. And then do some changes and bug fix by the way [2/4 and 3/4].fsstress and fsx are important tools in xfstests to do filesystem I/Os test, lots of test cases use it. So add
IO_URINGoperation into fsstress and fsx will help to coverIO_URINGtest from fs side.I'm not an
IO_URINGexpert, so cc io-uring@ list, please feel free to tell me if you find something wrong or have any suggestions to improve the test.V2 did below changes:
1) 1/4 change the definition ofURING_ENTRIESto 1
2) 2/4 change the difinition ofAIO_ENTRIESto 1, undo an unrelated changed line
3) 4/4 turn to use io_uring_prep_readv/io_uring_prep_writev, due to old liburing(0.2-2) doesn't support io_uring_prep_read/io_uring_prep_write.
Quoted 3 lines
V3 changed
io_uring_submit(&ring)toio_uring_submit_and_wait(&ring, 1). I'm not sure if this's the real mean of Jens Axboe's review point, please check.
https://marc.info/?l=fstests&m=159811932808057&w=2
Ping, any review point about this version, it only has a little change.
Thanks,
Zorro
Quoted 6 lines
Thanks,
Zorro