[pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup] mapped loop device: use read loop instead of read_exact
Wolfgang Bumiller
w.bumiller at proxmox.com
Mon Nov 27 14:22:15 CET 2023
On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 12:32:13PM +0200, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> since read_exact does not support short reads, which can easily happen if the
> mapped image's EOF is not aligned with the request size.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fabian Grünbichler <f.gruenbichler at proxmox.com>
> ---
>
> Notes:
> reported on the forum:
>
> https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/problem-backing-up-using-backup-client.129347
>
> did a quick test reading from a mapped image full of random data, observed
> no performance difference..
Do you get one if we just drop the loop logic and *actually* just
`read()` once? IMO this is more in line with what a read syscall
*should* be doing.
Further, we use a `CachedChunkReader` under it which actually does a
read loop anyway, so AFAICT this *can't* make a difference.
>
> pbs-fuse-loop/src/fuse_loop.rs | 19 +++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/pbs-fuse-loop/src/fuse_loop.rs b/pbs-fuse-loop/src/fuse_loop.rs
> index 3d0ef123..7e780799 100644
> --- a/pbs-fuse-loop/src/fuse_loop.rs
> +++ b/pbs-fuse-loop/src/fuse_loop.rs
> @@ -188,13 +188,20 @@ impl<R: AsyncRead + AsyncSeek + Unpin> FuseLoopSession<R> {
> match self.reader.seek(SeekFrom::Start(req.offset)).await {
> Ok(_) => {
> let mut buf = vec![0u8; req.size];
> - match self.reader.read_exact(&mut buf).await {
> - Ok(_) => {
> - req.reply(&buf)
> - },
> - Err(e) => {
> - req.io_fail(e)
> + let mut read = 0;
> + let mut res = Ok(());
> + while read < req.size && res.is_ok() {
> + match self.reader.read(&mut buf).await {
> + Ok(0) => { break; },
> + Ok(n) => { read += n; },
> + Err(e) => { res = Err(e); },
> }
> + };
> + if let Err(e) = res {
> + req.io_fail(e)
> + } else {
> + buf.truncate(read);
> + req.reply(&buf)
> }
> },
> Err(e) => {
> --
> 2.39.2
More information about the pbs-devel
mailing list