Re: [PATCH] io_uring: Add IO_U_F_DEVICE_ERROR to identify error types

[Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>]

On 9/26/24 3:33 PM, Minwoo Im wrote:
> On 24-09-26 15:06:49, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 9/26/24 12:08 PM, Vincent Fu wrote:
>>> On 9/26/24 13:48, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>> On 9/25/24 6:41 PM, Minwoo Im wrote:
>>>>> diff --git a/io_u.h b/io_u.h
>>>>> index ab93d50f967e..20afad667ee1 100644
>>>>> --- a/io_u.h
>>>>> +++ b/io_u.h
>>>>> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ enum {
>>>>>       IO_U_F_BARRIER        = 1 << 6,
>>>>>       IO_U_F_VER_LIST        = 1 << 7,
>>>>>       IO_U_F_PATTERN_DONE    = 1 << 8,
>>>>> +    IO_U_F_DEVICE_ERROR    = 1 << 9,
>>>>>   };
>>>>>     /*
>>>>
>>>> The patches you sent should've been a series, how are they supposed to
>>>> both apply when you add an item here for each of them as if the other
>>>> one doesn't exist?
>>>>
>>>> I'll fix it up, but for the future, if patches depend on each other, it
>>>> should be a series. Please check if everything works when it's pushed
>>>> out, which should be shortly.
>>>>
>>>> And since I'm on a plane and this doesn't appear to want to send, when
>>>> you do see it, please also add HOWTO additions similar to the fio.1
>>>> additions you made.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Also, Minwoo, we are seeing some build failures with your patches with
>>> compilers rejecting abs(io_u->error) since error is unsigned. Please
>>> fix that up as well.
>>
>> Doh yes, I fixed that up now.
> 
> Jens,
> 
> How about the following one for the fix?  (checked with clang)
> 
> diff --git a/engines/io_uring.c b/engines/io_uring.c
> index 6c07c1011c40..85cebf8371cf 100644
> --- a/engines/io_uring.c
> +++ b/engines/io_uring.c
> @@ -589,7 +589,7 @@ ret:
>                 io_u_set(td, io_u, IO_U_F_DEVICE_ERROR);
>         else
>                 io_u_clear(td, io_u, IO_U_F_DEVICE_ERROR);
> -       io_u->error = io_u->error;
> +       io_u->error = abs((int)io_u->error);
>         return io_u;
>  }
> 
> io_u->error is unsigned, but it can have negative value as an errno.
> io_u->error should be converted to a positive one especially when it's
> an errno.  If we don't, it will be like Unknown error:
> 
> fio: io_u error on file /dev/ng0n1: Unknown error -22: write offset=429916160, buflen=1048576

Yeah I think that looks good. Can you send this as a patch against the
current tree? I did do a fixup, but way too jet lagged and it's
obviously garbage.

-- 
Jens Axboe