On 06/02/2019 06:21, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote: > Hi, > > Since discussion of the storage stack and device driver at the LSFMM 2017 > (https://lwn.net/Articles/717699/), Omar Sandoval introduced a new framework > "blktests" dedicated for Linux Kernel Block layer testing. > (https://lwn.net/Articles/722785/, https://github.com/osandov/blktests). > > As Linux Kernel Block layer is central to the various file systems and underlying > low-level device drivers it is important to have a centralized testing framework and > make sure it grows with the latest block layer changed which are being added based > on the different device features from different device types > (e.g. NVMe devices with Zoned Namespace support). > > Since then blktests has grown and became go-to framework where we have integrated > different stand-alone test suites like SRP-tests, NVMFTESTS, NVMe Multipath tests, > zone block device tests, into one central framework, which has made an overall block layer > testing and development much easier than having to configure and execute different > test cases for each kernel release for different subsystems such as FS, NVMe, > Zone Block devices, etc). > > Here is the list of the existing test categories:- > > ├── block 28 Tests > ├── loop 07 Tests > ├── meta 12 Tests > ├── nbd 02 Tests > ├── nvme 28 Tests > ├── nvmeof-mp 12 Tests > ├── scsi 06 Tests > ├── srp 13 Tests > └── zbd 05 Tests > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > 9 Categories ~110 Tests > > This project has gathered much attention and storage stack community is actively > participating and adding new test cases with different categories to the framework. > > For storage track, we 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? > E.g. Implementing new features in the null_blk.c in order to have device > independent complete test coverage. (e.g. adding discard command for null_blk or any > other specific REQ_OP). Discussion about having any new tracepoint events in the block layer. > 4. Any new test cases/categories which are lacking in the blktests framework. One thing I'd love to see is more hardware/driver specific tests. I'm sure Broadcom, Marvell, Huawei and all the others out there do have test suites for their HBA drivers but not a single one of these tests is publicly available. We're also lacking tests for things like ioprio, persistent reservation, bcache and so on. Adding support for collecting gcov information after running a test case would also be awesome (this is missing in xfstests as well). So I think a session on blktests can help us get the gap closed. Byte, Johannes -- Johannes Thumshirn SUSE Labs Filesystems jthumshirn@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 689 SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850
