lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jul]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: scsi-mq V2
Date
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> writes:

> On 2014-07-10 17:11, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org> writes:
>>
>>>>
>>>> [ 186.339064] ioctx_alloc: nr_events=-2 aio_max_nr=65536
>>>> [ 186.339065] ioctx_alloc: nr_events=-2 aio_max_nr=65536
>>>> [ 186.339067] ioctx_alloc: nr_events=-2 aio_max_nr=65536
>>>> [ 186.339068] ioctx_alloc: nr_events=-2 aio_max_nr=65536
>>>> [ 186.339069] ioctx_alloc: nr_events=-2 aio_max_nr=65536
>>>
>>> Something is horribly wrong here. There is no way that value for nr_events
>>> should be passed in to ioctx_alloc(). This implies that userland is calling
>>> io_setup() with an impossibly large value for nr_events. Can you post the
>>> actual diff for your fs/aio.c relative to linus' tree?
>>>
>>
>> fio does exactly this! it passes INT_MAX.
>
> That's correct, I had actually forgotten about this. It was a change
> made a few years back, in correlation with the aio optimizations
> posted then, basically telling aio to ignore that silly (and broken)
> user ring.

I still don't see how you accomplish that. Making it bigger doesn't get
rid of it. ;-)

Cheers,
Jeff


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-07-10 22:42    [W:0.263 / U:4.704 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site