On 18/06/2024 4:24, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote: > CC+: linux-nvme, Daniel, Chaitanya, > > On Jun 17, 2024 / 19:05, Ofir Gal wrote: > [...] >>>> diff --git a/tests/md/001 b/tests/md/001 >>>> new file mode 100755 >>>> index 0000000..d5fb755 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/tests/md/001 >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,80 @@ >>>> +#!/bin/bash >>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-3.0+ >>>> +# Copyright (C) 2024 Ofir Gal >>>> +# >>>> +# Regression test for patch "md/md-bitmap: fix writing non bitmap pages" and >>>> +# for patch "nvme-tcp: use sendpages_ok() instead of sendpage_ok()" >>>> + >>>> +. tests/md/rc >>>> +. tests/nvme/rc >>> I want to avoid cross references acoss test groups. So far, all test groups do >>> not have any cross reference to keep them independent. How about to add this >>> test case to the nvme test group? >> I don't mind to add it to the nvme test group, just to clarify the test >> checks a bug in md. The bug is "visible" only when the underlying device >> of the raid is a network block device that utilize MSG_SPLICE_PAGES. > Good to know this background. I suggest to add the last sentence above to the > test case script header comment. Will do. >> nvme-tcp is used as the network device, I'm not sure it's related to >> the nvme test group. What do you think? > I see... The bug is in md sub-system, then it's the better to have the new test > case in the new md test group. To avoid the cross reference, the nvmet related > helper functions should move from tests/nvme/rc to common/nvmet, so that this > test/md/001 can refer them. This will be another separated, preparation patch. Ok, should it be a patch set or two completely separated patches? >>>> +. common/brd >>>> + >>>> +DESCRIPTION="Create a raid with bitmap on top of nvme device with >>>> +optimal-io-size over bitmap size" >>> This descrption is printed as blktests runs. All other blktests have single line >>> description then the two lines description looks strange. Can we make it shorter >>> to fit in one line? >> Yes, does "Raid with bitmap on nvme device with opt-io-size over bitmap >> size" sounds good? > The word "tcp" sounds important. And the word "nvmet" sounds better than "nvme". > So how about: "Raid with bitmap on tcp nvmet with opt-io-size over bitmap size"? Sounds good to me.
