| Message ID | 20200823063032.17297-5-zlang@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | fsstress,fsx: add io_uring test and do some fix | expand |
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 <zlang@redhat.com> > --- 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 >
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 <zlang@redhat.com> > > --- > > 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 > >
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 <zlang@redhat.com> > > > --- > > > > 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 > > >
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;
New IO_URING test for fsx, use -U option to enable IO_URING test. Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <zlang@redhat.com> --- ltp/fsx.c | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 144 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)