On 10/24/2017 08:10 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>
>> Il giorno 24 ott 2017, alle ore 08:28, Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@xxxxxxxxx> ha scritto:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> If memory serves it's actually slightly more complicated. If you are
>> using loops=<number> then I *think* (you'll have to check) you will
>> find that invalidation happens once per each loop start. However when
>> you use time_based to do the repetition there is essentially only one
>> "loop" (even though the job goes on forever) so loop actions only
>> happen right at the start of the job with that option (that's why I
>> put the scare quotes around "beginning" ;-).
>>
>
> Thanks for this additional, useful piece of information. Actually,
> this further, possibly different caching behavior makes me think that
> some extra comment in the manpage might be helpful.
Would probably make sense to change 'invalidate' to be a range of
possible values:
0 As it is now, never invalidate
1 As it is now, invalidate initially
once Same as '1', invalidate initially / once
open New value, invalidate on every open
close New value, invalidate on close
as I can definitely see reasons why you would want to invalidate every
time you open the file.
To do that, the 'invalidate' option should be changed from a
FIO_OPT_BOOL to a FIO_OPT_STR, and the above possible values should be
added as posval[] for that option.
Compliment that with the an enum of ranges for the ovals:
enum {
FIO_FILE_INVALIDATE_OFF = 0,
FIO_FILE_INVALIDATE_ONCE,
FIO_FILE_INVALIDATE_OPEN,
FIO_FILE_INVALIDATE_CLOSE
};
Hope this makes sense, should be trivial to add as most of the work is
already documented in this email :-). The remaining bits is just calling
file_invalidate_cache() in the proper locations,
td_io_{open,close}_file() would be prime candidates.
--
Jens Axboe
--
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
