On Jan 23, 2024 / 16:07, 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. Thanks Chaitanya, I'm interested in them too. I can share my view on the current status of blktests. > > One discussion point I'd like to add is > > - running blktest against real hardare/target Agreed. I guess this maybe meant for real RDMA hardware, which was discussed in a couple of GitHub pull requests [1][2]. [1] https://github.com/osandov/blktests/pull/86 [2] https://github.com/osandov/blktests/pull/127 Another topic I suggest is, - Automated blktests runs and reports Recently I learned that CKI project runs blktests regularly against Linus master branch and linux-block for-next branch, then makes the run results visible on the net [3][4]. Now I'm trying to understand detailed conditions of the test runs. If we can discuss and clarify what kind of run conditions will help storage kernel developers, it will be a good input to CKI project, hopefully. [3] https://datawarehouse.cki-project.org/kcidb/tests?tree_filter=mainline.kernel.org&kernel_version_filter=&arch_filter=x86_64&test_filter=blktests&host_filter=&testresult_filter= [4] https://datawarehouse.cki-project.org/kcidb/tests?tree_filter=block&kernel_version_filter=&arch_filter=x86_64&test_filter=blktests&host_filter=&testresult_filter=
