From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BBADC433E0 for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 15:24:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35656207F7 for ; Wed, 12 Aug 2020 15:24:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726226AbgHLPYT convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Aug 2020 11:24:19 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:44726 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726447AbgHLPYP (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Aug 2020 11:24:15 -0400 From: bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org To: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: [Bug 208827] [fio io_uring] io_uring write data crc32c verify failed Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 15:24:14 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: AssignedTo filesystem_xfs@kernel-bugs.kernel.org X-Bugzilla-Product: File System X-Bugzilla-Component: XFS X-Bugzilla-Version: 2.5 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jmoyer@redhat.com X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: filesystem_xfs@kernel-bugs.kernel.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208827 --- Comment #24 from Jeff Moyer (jmoyer@redhat.com) --- Jens Axboe writes: > Yes, it would ideally wait, or at least trigger on the last one. I'll > see if I can improve that. For any of my testing, the amount of > triggered short reads is minimal. For the verify case that we just ran, > we're talking 8-12 ios out of 820 thousand, or 0.001% of them. So > nothing that makes a performance difference in practical terms, though > it would be nice to not hand back short reads if we can avoid it. Not > for performance reasons, but for usage reasons. I think you could make the case that handing back a short read is a bug (unless RWF_NOWAIT was specified, of course). At the very least, it violates the principle of least surprise, and the fact that it happens infrequently actually makes it a worse problem when it comes to debugging. -Jeff -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching the assignee of the bug.