On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 12:16:10AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > As for the higher level question? The shared tests always confused the > heck out of me. generic with the right feature checks seem like a much > better idea. Agreed. I've sent out a patch series to bring the number of patches in shared down to four. Here's what's left: shared/002 --- needs a feature test to somehow determine whether a file system supports thousads of xattrs in a file (currently on btrfs and xfs) shared/011 --- needs some way of determining that a file system supports cgroup-aware writeback (currently enabled only for ext4 and btrfs). Do we consider lack of support of cgroup-aware writeback a bug? If so, maybe it doesn't need a feature test at all? shared/032 --- needs a feature test to determine whether or not a file system's mkfs supports detection of "foreign file systems". e.g., whether or not it warns if you try overwrite a file system w/o another file system. (Currently enabled by xfs and btrfs; it doesn't work for ext[234] because e2fsprogs, because I didn't want to break existing shell scripts, only warns when it is used interactively. We could a way to force it to be activated it points out this tests is fundamentally testing implementation choices of the userspace utilities of a file system. Does it belong in xfstests? : ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ) shared/289 --- contains ext4, xfs, and btrfs mechanisms for determining blocks which are unallocated. Has hard-coded invocations to dumpe2fs, xfs_db, and /bin/btrfs. These don't have obvious solutions. We could maybe add a _notrun if adding the thousands of xattrs fails with an ENOSPC or related error (f2fs uses something else). Maybe we just move shared/011 and move it generic/ w/o a feature test. Maybe we remove shared/032 altogether, since for e2fsprogs IMHO the right place to put it is the regression test in e2fsprogs --- but I know xfs has a different test philosophy for xfsprogs; and tha begs the question of what to do for mkfs.btrfs. And maybe we just split up shared/289 to three different tests in ext4/, xfs/, and btrfs/, since it would make the test script much simpler to understand? What do people think? - Ted
