mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Kent Overstreet <kmo@daterainc.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>, Zach Brown <zab@zabbo.net>,
	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>, Slava Pestov <sp@daterainc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] aio: Fix return code of io_submit() (RFC)
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 12:13:39 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <542EE753.20005@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1412359693-2535-1-git-send-email-kmo@daterainc.com>

On 2014-10-03 12:08, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> io_submit() could return -EAGAIN on memory allocation failure when it should
> really have been returning -ENOMEM. This could confuse applications (i.e. fio)
> since -EAGAIN means "too many requests outstanding, wait until completions have
> been reaped" and if the application actually was tracking outstanding
> completions this wouldn't make a lot of sense.
>
> NOTE:
>
> the man page seems to imply that the current behaviour (-EAGAIN on allocation
> failure) has always been the case. I don't think it makes a lot of sense, but
> this should probably be discussed more widely in case applications have somehow
> come to rely on the current behaviour...

We can't really feasibly fix this, is my worry. Fio does track the 
pending requests and does not get into a getevents() forever wait if it 
gets -EAGAIN on submission. But before the fix, it would loop forever in 
submission in -EAGAIN.

How are applications supposed to deal with ENOMEM? I think the answer 
here is that they can't, it would be a fatal condition. AIO must provide 
isn't own guarantee of progress, with a mempool or similar.


-- 
Jens Axboe


  reply	other threads:[~2014-10-03 18:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-10-03 18:08 Kent Overstreet
2014-10-03 18:13 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2014-10-03 18:21   ` Kent Overstreet
2014-10-03 18:25     ` Jens Axboe
2014-10-03 18:22   ` Benjamin LaHaise
2014-10-03 18:31     ` Kent Overstreet
2014-10-03 18:39       ` Jens Axboe
2014-10-03 18:36     ` Jens Axboe
2014-10-03 18:19 ` Benjamin LaHaise

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=542EE753.20005@kernel.dk \
    --to=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bcrl@kvack.org \
    --cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=kmo@daterainc.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sp@daterainc.com \
    --cc=zab@zabbo.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®