On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 01:25:52PM +0530, Anju T Sudhakar wrote: > Skip this test on 64k, as 4k as taken as the default block size. > > Signed-off-by: Anju T Sudhakar <anju@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > But I have a Query: > This test fails on ext4&xfs with 64k block size. Do we need to > rephrase this test to incorporate the 64k bs scenario as well? > If not we can skip this test. Right, we should fix the test to use multiples of block size rather than fixed byte sizes as we do for all the other tests that need to work across different block sizes. e.g. probe the block size after mkfs and then convert the "48k" numbers to "$((12 * $bs))". Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
