From: Shinichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com>
To: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>
Cc: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@nvidia.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <Chaitanya.Kulkarni@wdc.com>,
Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH blktests v2] nvme: add nvmf reset/disconnect during traffic test
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2022 00:33:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220712003323.zcndbxwmp2a4pcb6@shindev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7f9de1b6-f3bb-1c94-7a57-65e77254db0c@grimberg.me>
On Jul 11, 2022 / 11:22, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
>
> > > O
> > > > +
> > > > + # do reset/remove operation
> > > > + echo "resetting controller"
> > > > + _nvme_reset_ctrl ${nvmedev}
> > > > + sleep 1
> > > > + echo "deleting controller"
> > > > + _nvme_delete_ctrl ${nvmedev}
> > > > +
> > > > + echo "stopping background fio"
> > > > + { kill $!; wait; } &> /dev/null
> > >
> > > do we really need to kill the fio process explicitly ?
> > > I think graceful termination of the traffic application should be
> > > a part of this test without explicitly killing the process.
> > >
> > > I ran the test with commenting above line it runs fine :-
> > >
> > > blktests (master) # git diff
> > > diff --git a/tests/nvme/040 b/tests/nvme/040
> > > index d259784..0dce128 100755
> > > --- a/tests/nvme/040
> > > +++ b/tests/nvme/040
> > > @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ test() {
> > > _nvme_delete_ctrl ${nvmedev}
> > >
> > > echo "stopping background fio"
> > > - { kill $!; wait; } &> /dev/null
> > > +#{ kill $!; wait; } &> /dev/null
> > >
> > > _remove_nvmet_subsystem_from_port "${port}" "${subsys}"
> > > _remove_nvmet_subsystem "${subsys}"
> > > blktests (master) # ./check nvme/040
> > > nvme/040 (test nvme fabrics controller reset/disconnect operation during
> > > I/O) [passed]
> > > runtime 8.119s ... 8.084s
> > > blktests (master) #
> > >
> > > -ck
> >
> > Sagi, what do you think on this comment?
> >
> > To keep this test case consistent with nvme/032, it would be the better to keep
> > the kill and wait. But we may not need to stick to it if it does better testing
> > without the kill and wait.
>
> I don't particularly care. Can you remove it when applying?
Sure, I've applied with the edit.
--
Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-12 0:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-30 15:44 [PATCH blktests v2] nvme: add nvmf reset/disconnect during traffic test Sagi Grimberg
2022-06-30 21:24 ` Alan Adamson
2022-07-01 9:43 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2022-07-11 0:41 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2022-07-11 8:22 ` Sagi Grimberg
2022-07-12 0:33 ` Shinichiro Kawasaki [this message]
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=20220712003323.zcndbxwmp2a4pcb6@shindev \
--to=shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com \
--cc=Chaitanya.Kulkarni@wdc.com \
--cc=chaitanyak@nvidia.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/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