Re: ZBC/FLEX FIO addition ideas

[Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com>]

On Thu, 2018-03-15 at 13:40 -0600, Phillip Chen wrote:
> I haven't used the profile argument for FIO before, so when I read
> profile I thought it was being used as a synonym I/O profile or
> workload. So I think you're right that we shouldn't be creating a new
> profile for ZBC but rather focusing on the existing FIO generated
> workloads.
> When I was talking about valid I meant that get_next_block() would
> generate IO that would not cause errors or read filler data past the
> write pointer rather than having zbc_adjust_block() modify the IO
> afterwards.
> You make a good point that the two approaches can easily coexist. If
> you get your changes added I would like to try and build the
> additional workloads on top of your existing changes so that I can
> leverage your write pointer tracking code.

Hello Phillip,

That sounds like a plan to me :-) Can you have a look at the following code:
https://github.com/bvanassche/fio/tree/zbc. The quick fio tests I ran with
this code work fine with the ZBC and ZAC disks I tried.

I will send that code to Jens once the following two pull requests have been
accepted:
* "Improvements for analyzing fio with Valgrind"
  (https://github.com/axboe/fio/pull/560).
* "Add an asprintf() implementation" (https://github.com/axboe/fio/pull/561).

Thanks,

Bart.