On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 04:30:40PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 02:26:56AM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote: > > fstests has merged below change 2 month ago: > > [PATCH] fstests: update group name according to xfs_io command requirement > > https://lore.kernel.org/fstests/20221108183242.3362013-1-zlang@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > So I'd like to check if it helps for the problem you described above? > > If not, I think we can think about the patch you metioned above. > > Oops, sorry, this got lost in my inbox. :-( > > It definitely helped, thanks. My one observation about this patch is > that it's a one-time fix-up. I tried rerunning the script referenced > in the patch, and there were 11 tests that it "fixed up". Now, they > were all adding tests to the "prealloc" group, which I think you had > deliberately excluded, because they weren't actually testing prealloc, > but it's the worry that future fstests developers might forget to set > the group name correctly, which is why I still have "common: introduce > XFS_IO_AVOID env var"[1] as an out of tree patch. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/1445107518-32022-1-git-send-email-tytso@xxxxxxx/ > > It's a small change, it almost never conflicts with upstream changes > (generally the only time I have to deal with a conflcit when rebasing > is when a new environment variable is added to the documentation in > README), and it means that when I run "kvm-xfstests --no-collapse", my > wrapper scripts do this: > > no_collapse) > ALL_FSSTRESS_AVOID="$ALL_FSSTRESS_AVOID -f collapse=0" > ALL_FSX_AVOID="$ALL_FSX_AVOID -C" > ALL_XFS_IO_AVOID="$ALL_XFS_IO_AVOID fcollapse" > FSTESTSET="$FSTESTSET -x collapse" > ;; > > and I'm *guaranteed* to make sure that any tests involving > collapse_range will be skipped. Do I strictly speaking need the > out-of-tree patch in [1], probably not, assuming the group list is > always kept up to date, and to be honest it's been a *long* time since > I've never needed to use gce-xfstests --no-collapse or --no-insert. Many thanks, glad to know that helps. Tell the truth, the "XFS_IO_AVOID" is more like a trick of the "exclude individual tests (./check -X)". If a case contains an operation (e.g. collapse), we can't skip it by group name, but can do that through a trick. That cause fstests leave a "group name missing bug" there, and we even try to hide it. So the best way I think is anyone who can't skip a test properly by a group name, please report that bug to fstests. Let's fix it. BTW, I really tried to notice the missed group name from that day when I review new cases, especially if there're some obvious xfs_io operations. But some operations might be hide, feel free to report/fix that if anyone find :) Thanks, Zorro > > However, the cost of keeping the out-of-tree patch in my local > xfstests git repo is quite low, so I've just kept it. But do I *need* > it? Arguably, no, which is why I haven't been bugging you about it. > :-) > > - Ted >
