Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>> CCing Ritesh as I saw him post a patch to fix a testcase for 64k block size.
>>
>> Hi Pankaj,
>>
>> So I tested this on Linux 6.6 on Power8 qemu (which I had it handy).
>> xfs/558 passed with both 64k blocksize & with 4k blocksize on a 64k
>> pagesize system.
Ok, so it looks like the testcase xfs/558 is failing on linux-next with
64k blocksize but passing with 4k blocksize.
It thought it was passing on my previous linux 6.6 release, but I guess
those too were just some lucky runs. Here is the report -
linux-next: xfs/558 aggregate results across 11 runs: pass=2 (18.2%), fail=9 (81.8%)
v6.6: xfs/558 aggregate results across 11 runs: pass=5 (45.5%), fail=6 (54.5%)
So I guess, I will spend sometime analyzing why the failure.
Failure log
================
xfs/558 36s ... - output mismatch (see /root/xfstests-dev/results//xfs_64k_iomap/xfs/558.out.bad)
--- tests/xfs/558.out 2023-06-29 12:06:13.824276289 +0000
+++ /root/xfstests-dev/results//xfs_64k_iomap/xfs/558.out.bad 2024-01-23 18:54:56.613116520 +0000
@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@
QA output created by 558
+Expected to hear about writeback iomap invalidations?
Silence is golden
...
(Run 'diff -u /root/xfstests-dev/tests/xfs/558.out /root/xfstests-dev/results//xfs_64k_iomap/xfs/558.out.bad' to see the entire diff)
HINT: You _MAY_ be missing kernel fix:
5c665e5b5af6 xfs: remove xfs_map_cow
-ritesh
>
> Thanks for testing it out. I will investigate this further, and see why
> I have this failure in LBS for 64k and not for 32k and 16k block sizes.
>
> As this test also expects some invalidation during the page cache writeback,
> this might an issue just with LBS and not for 64k page size machines.
>
> Probably I will also spend some time to set up a Power8 qemu to test these failures.
>
>> However, since on this system the quota was v4.05, it does not support
>> bigtime feature hence could not run xfs/161.
>>
>> xfs/161 [not run] quota: bigtime support not detected
>> xfs/558 7s ... 21s
>>
>> I will collect this info on a different system with latest kernel and
>> will update for xfs/161 too.
>>
>
> Sounds good! Thanks!
>
>> -ritesh
