On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 08:25:36AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 06/26/2017 08:06 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 09:36:14AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > >> On 06/23/2017 08:29 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > >>> From: Omar Sandoval <osandov@xxxxxx> > >>> > >>> This test-case performs I/O with fio while doing PCI disable/enable > >>> cycles. > >>> > >>> In the results we don't care for I/O errors but for hiccups in dmesg only. > >> > >> Let's get this in, that would be a very useful test. A few comments - > >> not necessarily on this patch in particular, but for future cleanups > >> and improvements. > >> > >>> + if _test_dev_is_rotational; then > >>> + size="32m" > >>> + else > >>> + size="1g" > >>> + fi > >> > >> I introduced this idea in one of my previous patches. I wonder if we > >> should turn that into a helper. Pass in the dev, get returned a > >> suitable fio size, instead of hard coding this in each job that > >> needs it. What I wanted to have here eventually is a helper that you can run when you just want arbitrary I/O. Haven't gotten around to it. > > > > Sure. > > > >> > >>> + # start fio job > >>> + _run_fio --bs=4k --rw=randread --norandommap \ > >>> + --name=reads --filename="$TEST_DEV" --size="$size" \ > >>> + --numjobs=8 --direct=1 2>/dev/null & > >> > >> I don't believe we check for fio errors right now, but we probably > >> should in the future. So I think you'd want to add something ala: > >> > >> --ignore_error=EIO,ENXIO,ENODEV > >> > >> to your options to make it explicit that you don't care about IO > >> errors for this test. Yup, we redirect fio errors to /dev/null everywhere, we should fix that. > > Oh nice, didn't know about the option. Btw as we're currently all have > > arbitrary values for the numjobs parameter, how about a wrapper over getconf > > _NPROCESSORS_ONLN? > > Yes that's a good idea, then we can at least size the jobs based on > how many cores we have. We can just use nproc for this.
