On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 04:07:48PM +0100, Daniel Wagner wrote: > On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 09:50:50AM +0100, Daniel Wagner wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 06:30:46AM +0000, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote: > > > For storage track, I would like to propose a session dedicated to > > > blktests. It is a great opportunity for the storage developers to gather > > > and have a discussion about:- > > > > > > 1. Current status of the blktests framework. > > > 2. Any new/missing features that we want to add in the blktests. > > > 3. Any new kernel features that could be used to make testing easier? > > > 4. DM/MD Testcases. > > > 5. Potentially adding VM support in the blktests. > > > > I am interested in such a session. > > One discussion point I'd like to add is > > - running blktest against real hardare/target We've resolved this in fstests with canonicalizing device symlinks, and through kdevops its possible to even use PCIe passthrough onto a guest using dynamic kconfig (ie, specific to the host). It should be possible to do that in blktests too, but the dynamic kconfig thing is outside of scope, but this is a long winded way of suggestin that if we extend blktests to add a canonon-similar device function, then since kdevops supports blktests you get that pcie passthrough for free too. Luis
