On Oct 18, 2022 / 12:16, Vincent Fu wrote:
> On 10/18/22 00:17, Shin'ichiro Kawasaki wrote:
> > Add a test case to confirm fix of bytes_done accounting issue of
> > experimental verify. The test job runs a simple workload with
> > experimental verify and confirm read amount is not zero.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shin'ichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > t/jobs/t0025.fio | 8 ++++++++
> > t/run-fio-tests.py | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 t/jobs/t0025.fio
> >
> > diff --git a/t/jobs/t0025.fio b/t/jobs/t0025.fio
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 00000000..2b35a9ac
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/t/jobs/t0025.fio
> > @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
> > +[job]
> > +filename=t0025file
> > +size=128k
> > +readwrite=write
> > +do_verify=1
> > +verify=md5
> > +experimental_verify=1
> > +
> > diff --git a/t/run-fio-tests.py b/t/run-fio-tests.py
> > index df87ae72..0e15068d 100755
> > --- a/t/run-fio-tests.py
> > +++ b/t/run-fio-tests.py
> > @@ -788,6 +788,18 @@ class FioJobTest_t0024(FioJobTest_t0023):
> > self.check_all_offsets("bssplit_bw.log", 512, filesize)
> > +class FioJobTest_t0025(FioJobTest):
> > + """Test experimental verify read backs written data pattern."""
> > + def check_result(self):
> > + super(FioJobTest_t0025, self).check_result()
> > +
> > + if not self.passed:
> > + return
> > +
> > + if self.json_data['jobs'][0]['read']['io_kbytes'] == 0:
> > + self.passed = False
>
> Instead of merely checking that it's nonzero why not check that it is equal
> to the size of the file?
Okay, I'll modify the lines as follows:
if self.json_data['jobs'][0]['read']['io_kbytes'] != 128:
self.passed = False
Before the fix, the read io_kbytes was zero, so comparison with zero was enough
to confirm the fix. But comparison with the file size is stricter and better.
--
Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
