RE: FIO windows

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Ok, thanks.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jens Axboe [mailto:axboe@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2017 10:05 AM
To: Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@xxxxxxxxx>; David Hare <david.hare@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: fio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: FIO windows

Seems to me that we should just reset back to zero, and not worry about the io_size at all. This is what is screwing things up, and I can't think of why we would attempt to be more clever in wrapping around. The below should do the trick.

David, once appveyor finishes, you should be able to download the build here and re-test:

https://ci.appveyor.com/project/axboe/fio/build/job/p0misp4ehe96ti7d/artifacts

diff --git a/io_u.c b/io_u.c
index 4246edff0b2f..aac74bf6f7ad 100644
--- a/io_u.c
+++ b/io_u.c
@@ -363,14 +363,7 @@ static int get_next_seq_offset(struct thread_data *td, struct fio_file *f,
 
 	if (f->last_pos[ddir] >= f->io_size + get_start_offset(td, f) &&
 	    o->time_based) {
-		struct thread_options *o = &td->o;
-		uint64_t io_size = f->io_size + (f->io_size % o->min_bs[ddir]);
-
-		if (io_size > f->last_pos[ddir])
-			f->last_pos[ddir] = 0;
-		else
-			f->last_pos[ddir] = f->last_pos[ddir] - io_size;
-
+		f->last_pos[ddir] = 0;
 		loop_cache_invalidate(td, f);
 	}
 


On 11/01/2017 10:44 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> I just tried to reproduce on Linux, and I can. If the files don't 
> exist and I run this job:
> 
> [global]
> blocksize=64k
> direct=1
> group_reporting
> rw=read
> size=512m
> 
> [asdf]
> filename=testfile1:testfile2:testfile3
> 
> it works fine. Then I change the size to be 250m AND add time_based 
> and a longer runtime to ensure we hit the roll-around, and it fails:
> 
> fio win.fio
> asdf: (g=0): rw=read, bs=(R) 64.0KiB-64.0KiB, (W) 64.0KiB-64.0KiB, (T) 
> 64.0KiB-64.0KiB, ioengine=psync, iodepth=1 fio-3.1-76-g08bd-dirty 
> Starting 1 process
> fio: io_u error on file testfile1: Invalid argument: read 
> offset=21846, buflen=65536
> fio: pid=18198, err=22/file:io_u.c:1770, func=io_u error, 
> error=Invalid argument
> 
> So looks like a bug in the reset part. I'll take a look.
> 
> 
> On 10/31/2017 05:06 PM, Sitsofe Wheeler wrote:
>> OK I see the problem too when using this on Windows:
>> $ ./fio --size=1g --filename
>> fio1.tmp:fio2.tmp:fio3.tmp:fio4.tmp:fio5.tmp:fio6.tmp:fio7.tmp:fio8.t
>> mp:fio9.tmp
>> --name=go --create_only=1
>> $ ./fio --size=250m --filename fio1.tmp:fio2.tmp:fio3.tmp --name=go
>> --direct=1 --bs=64k --runtime=1m --time_based --thread
>>
>> Using --debug=all shows the following:
>> io       2796  getevents: 1
>> io       2796  io complete: io_u 0000000007BD8F00:
>> off=87359488/len=65536/ddir=0io       2796  /fio3.tmpio       2796
>> file     2796  put file fio3.tmp, ref=2
>> file     2796  trying file fio1.tmp 11
>> file     2796  goodf=1, badf=2, ff=11
>> file     2796  get_next_file_rr: 00007FF5FEEA4610
>> file     2796  get_next_file: 00007FF5FEEA4610 [fio1.tmp]
>> file     2796  get file fio1.tmp, ref=1
>> io       2796  fill_io_u: io_u 0000000007BD8F00:
>> off=21846/len=65536/ddir=0io       2796  /fio1.tmpio       2796
>> io       2796  prep: io_u 0000000007BD8F00:
>> off=21846/len=65536/ddir=0io       2796  /fio1.tmpio       2796
>> io       2796  queue: io_u 0000000007BD8F00:
>> off=21846/len=65536/ddir=0io       2796  /fio1.tmpio
>> helperthread 2796
>> 2796  since_ss: 0, next_ss: 1000, next_log: 495, msec_to_next_event: 136
>> file     2796  put file fio1.tmp, ref=2
>> io       2796  io_u_queued_complete: min=0
>> io       2796  getevents: 0
>> process  2796  pid=2936: runstate RUNNING -> FINISHING
>> fio: pid=2936, err=22/file:ioengines.c:335, func=td_io_queue, 
>> error=Invalid argument
>>
>> off=21846 is not a multiple of 512.
>>
>> $ du -b fio*tmp
>> 119304647       fio1.tmp
>> 119304647       fio2.tmp
>> 119304647       fio3.tmp
>> 119304647       fio4.tmp
>> 119304647       fio5.tmp
>> 119304647       fio6.tmp
>> 119304647       fio7.tmp
>> 119304647       fio8.tmp
>> 119304647       fio9.tmp
>>
>> I think this is all hinting at a bug in fio (perhaps when working 
>> with multiple pre-existing files that are bigger than size specified) 
>> but I think I'm done for the day...
>>
>> On 31 October 2017 at 22:51, David Hare <david.hare@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> Not sure what you mean by one file? The drives are local NTFS 
>>> formatted with Allocation unit size of 64k, they range in size from with are 186gb - 372gb.
>>
> 
> 


--
Jens Axboe

��.n��������+%������w��{.n�������^n�r������&��z�ޗ�zf���h���~����������_��+v���)ߣ�

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux