Re: [PATCH v2] generic: concurrent IO test with mixed IO types

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



On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 09:12:37PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 03:07:44PM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 08:29:33AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 08:41:11PM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote:
> > > > Test concurrent buffered I/O, DIO, AIO, mmap I/O and splice I/O on the
> > > > same files.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Eryu Guan <eguan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > 
> > > > This fio job file has been proven to be potent, it triggers WARNINGs on ext4
> > > > and xfs with 4.1-rc6 kernel.
> > > > 
> > > > ext4: WARNING: at fs/ext4/inode.c:1328
> > > > xfs: WARNING: CPU: 7 PID: 3090 at fs/xfs/xfs_file.c:726 xfs_file_dio_aio_write+0x176/0x2a8 [xfs]()
> > > > 
> > > > The ext4 issue should be fixed by Lukas's patch
> > > > ext4: fix reservation release on invalidatepage for delalloc fs
> > > > 
> > > > And it ever paniced kernel in mm code and hung xfs.
> > > > 
> > > > I reduced the numjobs and iodepth to reduce the test time(~25s on my test host)
> > > > and scale them by $LOAD_FACTOR. And it still could trigger the warning on ext4
> > > > and xfs with reduced workload.
> > > > 
> > > > v2:
> > > > - use mktemp to create tmp fio job file
> > > ....
> > > > +seq=`basename $0`
> > > > +seqres=$RESULT_DIR/$seq
> > > > +echo "QA output created by $seq"
> > > > +
> > > > +here=`pwd`
> > > > +fio_config=`mktemp`
> > > > +status=1	# failure is the default!
> > > > +trap "_cleanup; exit \$status" 0 1 2 3 15
> > > 
> > > By removing the definition of $tmp, you are now dumping all
> > > the temporary files the test harnes creates in /.
> > 
> > You're right, I see /fsck.log on my test host.
> > 
> > I checked 'check' and common/rc and chech has its "tmp=/tmp/$$"
> > definition and I thought I didn't use any functions from common/rc in my
> > test directly that depends on $tmp definition. I must have missed
> > something.
> > 
> > Should I send a v3 and roll back to v1? or you can just take v1?
> 
> You'll need a v3 to fix the problem with using an uninitialised,
> unmounted SCRATCH_DEV in the test...

How can I miss that.. Sorry and thanks!

Eryu
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux