On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 12:51:51AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote: > On Sat, Apr 28 2012 at 12:44am -0400, > Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The non power of 2 support patch required quite a few thinp-test-suite > fixes; this works for me but there may be more clever/clean ways to > address rounding down the pool size to a multiple of blocksize... Yes, I need to do some work here. We can't keep tweaking these magic numbers. - Some tests hardwire a block size, eg, my cache_tests, your non-power-2 tests. - Some tests can prove their point with a small pool size. So no point wasting time by running on bigger pools. - Some tests would definitely benefit by scaling up to larger pools, more thins etc, as hardware allows. But we should probably control this from the command line - big tests take a long time to run, so we shouldn't assume we should scale up the tests to consume all disk space. - different hardware has different logical block sizes, which can effect io sizes (eg, see discard tests). The code needs to make it clear that the sizes are being influenced by the LBS. - We should make it clear in the results, and the test source, which tests scaled up and how. eg, did data_block_size change?, data_dev_size? -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
