Send again without that long and misleading mail signature. Sorry for noise. Hello Jens, hello fio community. Anything? Anything at all? If not, I go by a NEWS.Debian entry that explains the issue, but otherwise I tend to leave intact the broken, but wide-spread default behavior. Thanks, Martin Martin Steigerwald - 28.08.17, 11:06: > I bcc´ed Debian bug report for this initial mail so it receives a record > that I forwarded this issue upstream. > > > Hello Jens, > > I got this bug report for fio Debian package: > > fio: uses the opposite symbol for kibibytes/kilobytes (Kb/KiB) than ISO > 80000-1 https://bugs.debian.org/872321 > > Its right. Completely right. The current behavior of fio is broken. > > But if I choose to divert from upstream default, I break *all included > examples* unless I patch them up to and I risk bug reports "my script broke > cause you decided to divert from upstream default behavior". Additionally > currently it seems to me that I have to patch fio source code, unless fio > supports a global configuration file in /etc, which, I believe, it does not. > > What do you suggest me to do? > > I am currently pondering the following options: > > - Adding a warning note to NEWS.Debian and README.Debian that at least users > who have apt-listchanges installed will see. > > - Add a debconf configuration option aka "Yes, be correct and break all > scripts", "No, let me stay compatible with upstream". But that wouldn´t > possible anyway unless there is a global configuration file for fio. > > None of these options sound appealing to me. > > > I really think this issue needs to be dealt with upstream, but I honestly do > not know how either. But just staying with the broken behavior for eternity > does not seem right to me. I think the move to fio 3 would have been an > opportunity, but thats gone. > > I wonder about the following compromize: > > - blocksize=4k => KiB, 4096 > - blocksize=4kb => KB, 4000 > - blocksize=4kib => KiB, 4096 > > This at least won´t break existing scripts unless they used kib, gib and so > on, I think. > > And it would at least fix: > > % fio --name=rand-read --bs=4k --size=1GiB --iodepth=64 --runtime=10 -- > rw=randread > […] > rand-read: Laying out IO file(s) (1 file(s) / 953MiB) > […] > > which is just as broken as it can become. Seriously, 1 GiB is not 953 MiB. > Period. > > > Even if thats an uncomfortable issue to deal with, I honestly don´t really > see it as my responsibility as a package maintainer to fix up broken > upstream behavior and probably receive the blame for doing so. If you > choose to stay with the current behavior I may at least add a note in > NEWS.Debian and README.Debian about the broken behavior tough. > > Thanks, -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
