On 24.03.26 10:22, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 24.03.2026 um 09:22 hat Hanna Czenczek geschrieben:
On 24.03.26 09:12, Hanna Czenczek wrote:
On 23.03.26 18:12, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 18.03.2026 um 16:32 hat Hanna Czenczek geschrieben:
Short reads/writes can happen.  One way to reproduce them is via our
FUSE export, with the following diff applied (%s/escaped // to apply --
if you put plain diffs in commit messages, git-am will apply
them, and I
would rather avoid breaking FUSE accidentally via this patch):

escaped diff --git a/block/export/fuse.c b/block/export/fuse.c
escaped index a2a478d293..67dc50a412 100644
escaped --- a/block/export/fuse.c
escaped +++ b/block/export/fuse.c
@@ -828,7 +828,7 @@ static ssize_t coroutine_fn GRAPH_RDLOCK
   fuse_co_init(FuseExport *exp, struct fuse_init_out *out,
                const struct fuse_init_in_compat *in)
   {
-    const uint32_t supported_flags = FUSE_ASYNC_READ | FUSE_ASYNC_DIO;
+    const uint32_t supported_flags = FUSE_ASYNC_READ;

       if (in->major != 7) {
           error_report("FUSE major version mismatch: We have 7,
but kernel has %"
@@ -1060,6 +1060,8 @@ fuse_co_read(FuseExport *exp, void
**bufptr, uint64_t offset, uint32_t size)
       void *buf;
       int ret;

+    size = MIN(size, 4096);
+
       /* Limited by max_read, should not happen */
       if (size > FUSE_MAX_READ_BYTES) {
           return -EINVAL;
@@ -1110,6 +1112,8 @@ fuse_co_write(FuseExport *exp, struct
fuse_write_out *out,
       int64_t blk_len;
       int ret;

+    size = MIN(size, 4096);
+
       QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON(FUSE_MAX_WRITE_BYTES > BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_BYTES);
       /* Limited by max_write, should not happen */
       if (size > FUSE_MAX_WRITE_BYTES) {

Then:
$ ./qemu-img create -f raw test.raw 8k
Formatting 'test.raw', fmt=raw size=8192
$ ./qemu-io -f raw -c 'write -P 42 0 8k' test.raw
wrote 8192/8192 bytes at offset 0
8 KiB, 1 ops; 00.00 sec (64.804 MiB/sec and 8294.9003 ops/sec)
$ hexdump -C test.raw
00000000  2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a  2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a
|****************|
*
00002000

With aio=threads, short I/O works:
$ storage-daemon/qemu-storage-daemon \
      --blockdev file,node-name=test,filename=test.raw \
      --export
fuse,id=exp,node-name=test,mountpoint=test.raw,writable=true

Other shell:
$ ./qemu-io --image-opts -c 'read -P 42 0 8k' \
      driver=file,filename=test.raw,cache.direct=on,aio=threads
read 8192/8192 bytes at offset 0
8 KiB, 1 ops; 00.00 sec (36.563 MiB/sec and 4680.0923 ops/sec)
$ ./qemu-io --image-opts -c 'write -P 23 0 8k' \
      driver=file,filename=test.raw,cache.direct=on,aio=threads
wrote 8192/8192 bytes at offset 0
8 KiB, 1 ops; 00.00 sec (35.995 MiB/sec and 4607.2970 ops/sec)
$ hexdump -C test.raw
00000000  17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17  17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17
|................|
*
00002000

But with aio=native, it does not:
$ ./qemu-io --image-opts -c 'read -P 23 0 8k' \
      driver=file,filename=test.raw,cache.direct=on,aio=native
Pattern verification failed at offset 0, 8192 bytes
read 8192/8192 bytes at offset 0
8 KiB, 1 ops; 00.00 sec (86.155 MiB/sec and 11027.7900 ops/sec)
$ ./qemu-io --image-opts -c 'write -P 42 0 8k' \
      driver=file,filename=test.raw,cache.direct=on,aio=native
write failed: No space left on device
$ hexdump -C test.raw
00000000  2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a  2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a
|****************|
*
00001000  17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17  17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17
|................|
*
00002000

This patch fixes that.

Signed-off-by: Hanna Czenczek <[email protected]>
---
   block/linux-aio.c | 61
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
   1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/linux-aio.c b/block/linux-aio.c
index 1f25339dc9..01621d4794 100644
--- a/block/linux-aio.c
+++ b/block/linux-aio.c
@@ -46,6 +46,10 @@ struct qemu_laiocb {
       size_t nbytes;
       QEMUIOVector *qiov;
   +    /* For handling short reads/writes */
+    size_t total_done;
+    QEMUIOVector resubmit_qiov;
+
       int type;
       BdrvRequestFlags flags;
       uint64_t dev_max_batch;
@@ -73,28 +77,61 @@ struct LinuxAioState {
   };
     static void ioq_submit(LinuxAioState *s);
+static int laio_do_submit(struct qemu_laiocb *laiocb);
     static inline ssize_t io_event_ret(struct io_event *ev)
   {
       return (ssize_t)(((uint64_t)ev->res2 << 32) | ev->res);
   }
   +/**
+ * Retry tail of short requests.
+ */
+static int laio_resubmit_short_io(struct qemu_laiocb *laiocb,
size_t done)
+{
+    QEMUIOVector *resubmit_qiov = &laiocb->resubmit_qiov;
+
+    laiocb->total_done += done;
+
+    if (!resubmit_qiov->iov) {
+        qemu_iovec_init(resubmit_qiov, laiocb->qiov->niov);
+    } else {
+        qemu_iovec_reset(resubmit_qiov);
+    }
+    qemu_iovec_concat(resubmit_qiov, laiocb->qiov,
+                      laiocb->total_done, laiocb->nbytes -
laiocb->total_done);
+
+    return laio_do_submit(laiocb);
+}
+
   /*
    * Completes an AIO request.
    */
   static void qemu_laio_process_completion(struct qemu_laiocb *laiocb)
   {
-    int ret;
+    ssize_t ret;
         ret = laiocb->ret;
       if (ret != -ECANCELED) {
-        if (ret == laiocb->nbytes) {
+        if (ret == laiocb->nbytes - laiocb->total_done) {
               ret = 0;
+        } else if (ret > 0 && (laiocb->type == QEMU_AIO_READ ||
+                               laiocb->type == QEMU_AIO_WRITE)) {
+            ret = laio_resubmit_short_io(laiocb, ret);
+            if (!ret) {
+                return;
+            }
           } else if (ret >= 0) {
-            /* Short reads mean EOF, pad with zeros. */
+            /*
+             * For normal reads and writes, we only get here if
ret == 0, which
+             * means EOF for reads and ENOSPC for writes.
+             * For zone-append, we get here with any ret >= 0,
which we just
+             * treat as ENOSPC, too (safer than resubmitting,
probably, but not
+             * 100 % clear).
+             */
               if (laiocb->type == QEMU_AIO_READ) {
-                qemu_iovec_memset(laiocb->qiov, ret, 0,
-                    laiocb->qiov->size - ret);
+                qemu_iovec_memset(laiocb->qiov, laiocb->total_done, 0,
+                                  laiocb->qiov->size -
laiocb->total_done);
               } else {
                   ret = -ENOSPC;
               }
@@ -102,6 +139,7 @@ static void
qemu_laio_process_completion(struct qemu_laiocb *laiocb)
       }
         laiocb->ret = ret;
+    qemu_iovec_destroy(&laiocb->resubmit_qiov);
Calling qemu_iovec_destroy() for a qiov that has potentially never been
initialised feels a bit unsafe to me. It will work in practice for the
current implementation, but maybe make this one conditional on
laiocb->resubmit_qiov.iov, too? (Which is already making assumptions
about the internals of QEMUIOVector, but that we'll have an iov after
initialising the qiov with qemu_iovec_init() above will probably never
change.)
Sure!

(For reference, the io-uring code calls qemu_iovec_destroy() the same
way, but I agree.  I’ll make that change there, too.)

       /*
        * If the coroutine is already entered it must be in
ioq_submit() and
@@ -380,23 +418,30 @@ static int laio_do_submit(struct
qemu_laiocb *laiocb)
       int fd = laiocb->fd;
       off_t offset = laiocb->offset;
I wonder if making it laiocb->offset + laiocb->total_done here wouldn't
be more robust than having the addition in every call below.
I had it that way originally, but then decided to put it into the calls
below to show better which ones can actually be retried. Yes, the ones
not retried (zone_append) will always have total_done == 0, but I found
this clearer, personally.

Maybe I’ll make it two variables, original_offset and offset.

Hanna

+    if (laiocb->resubmit_qiov.iov) {
+        qiov = &laiocb->resubmit_qiov;
+    }
+
Now that I actually touch this, this here makes me wonder what my point of
“yes, sure, total_done will be 0 on no resubmission anyway, but!” even was.
If this piece of code unconditionally uses the resubmit_qiov (when set up)
for all requests, including zone_append, we might as well include total_done
in the offset, for all requests.
I actually considered if I should suggest 'offset += laiocb->total_done'
in this if block instead of doing it right at initialisation, but then
thought what's the point, it's the same in practice anyway.

If you want to make the zone_append case clearer, we could add an
assertion that it's 0 there, if that feels better to you.

No, I think it’s ok as-is (with offset including total_done).  I’ve sent a v2.

Hanna


Reply via email to