From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <52273BF5.90109@enovance.com> Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 15:56:05 +0200 From: Erwan Velu MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: How to loop a timebased job References: <522639CE.2030705@enovance.com> <20130903223727.GB31170@kernel.dk> In-Reply-To: <20130903223727.GB31170@kernel.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jens Axboe Cc: "fio@vger.kernel.org" List-ID: On 04/09/2013 00:37, Jens Axboe wrote: > It should work, if it doesn't, I agree it's a bug. It's not certain > than anyone has considered this specific use case before. Feel free to > fix! Or I can take a look at it tomorrow. I think I found the issue but my main question is about priority. If both time & loops are set, what shall be considered as the key element to stop the benchmark. Today, time have the priority over loops as keep_running() returns if time_based while time is handled in do_io(). If I do remove this test in keep_running, the first of the two getting the limit will stop the job. On one hand, we have timebased option to insure time over end of device. Shall we put a loopbased on the other hand ? My 2 cents, Erwan