On Monday 31 Aug 2015 22:15:10 Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 05:49:14AM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote: > > mkfs.btrfs when invoked on small filesystems by "not" specifying any block > > sizes (i.e. mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/sda1) will automatically create filesystem > > instance with "data block size" == "metadata block size". However in the > > subpagesize-blocksize scenario, we need to specify both data and metadata > > block size on the command line (For e.g. mkfs.btrfs -f -s 4096 -n 16384 > > /dev/sda1). In this case, Since the user is forcing the block sizes and it > > is impossible to have mixed block groups with differing data and metadata > > block sizes, mkfs.btrfs will fail. > > Ok, so the issue is that for this particular test configuration, btrfs > has a minimum file system size. What about changing > _scratch_mkfs_sized so that if MIN_FS_SIZE is set, the file system > created will be at least MIN_FS_SIZE in size. > > This way it sets the minimum file system size for all tests, not just > generic/224, and any test configuration, whether it be ext4, xfs, or > btrfs where the data and metadata block size are the same, don't have > to take extra time -- only the test configuration of btrfs with > data_block_size != metadata_block_size. > I agree with the approach you have suggested. I will write up a patch and send it across the mailing list. Thanks Ted. -- chandan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
