From: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2023 1:11 PM > > On 1/20/23 9:56?PM, Michael Kelley (LINUX) wrote: > > From: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2023 1:06 PM [snip] > > > > I've wrapped up my testing on this patch. All testing was via > > io_uring -- I did not test other paths. Testing was against a > > combination of this patch and the previous patch set for a similar > > problem. [1] > > > > I tested with a simple test program to issue single I/Os, and verified > > the expected paths were taken through the block layer and io_uring > > code for various size I/Os, including over 1 Mbyte. No EAGAIN errors > > were seen. This testing was with a 6.1 kernel. > > > > Also tested the original app that surfaced the problem. It's a larger > > scale workload using io_uring, and is where the problem was originally > > encountered. That workload runs on a purpose-built 5.15 kernel, so I > > backported both patches to 5.15 for this testing. All looks good. No > > EAGAIN errors were seen. > > Thanks a lot for your thorough testing! Can you share the 5.15 > backports, so we can put them into 5.15-stable as well potentially? > Certainly. What's the best way to do that? Should I send them to you, or to the linux-block list? Or post directly to stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx? If the latter, maybe I need to wait until it has an upstream commit ID that can be referenced. Also, you or someone should do a quick review of the backport to make sure I didn't break something in a path I didn't test. Michael
