On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 07:30:06PM +0000, Sasha Levin wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 02:32:28PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > >How much time are your test rigs going to be able to spend running > >xfstests? A single pass on a single filesysetm config on spinning > >disks will take 3-4 hours of run time. And we have at least 4 common > >configs that need validation (v4, v4 w/ 512b block size, v5 > >(defaults), and v5 w/ reflink+rmap) and so you're looking at a > >minimum 12-24 hours of machine test time per kernel you'd need to > >test. > > No reason they can't run in parallel, right? Correct, parallelizing them turns horrifying long test runs into manageable quantities. > >> > From: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > To: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > To: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Darrick J . Wong" <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > Cc: Brian Foster <bfoster@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: Correctly invert xfs_buftarg LRU isolation logic > >> > In-Reply-To: <20180306102638.25322-1-vbendel@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > References: <20180306102638.25322-1-vbendel@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > > >> > Hi Vratislav Bendel, > >> > > >> > [This is an automated email] > >> > > >> > This commit has been processed by the -stable helper bot and determined > >> > to be a high probability candidate for -stable trees. (score: 6.4845) > >> > > >> > The bot has tested the following trees: v4.15.12, v4.14.29, v4.9.89, v4.4.123, v4.1.50, v3.18.101. > >> > > >> > v4.15.12: OK! > >> > v4.14.29: OK! > >> > v4.9.89: OK! > >> > v4.4.123: OK! > >> > v4.1.50: OK! > >> > v3.18.101: OK! > >> > > >> > Please reply with "ack" to have this patch included in the appropriate stable trees. > > > >That might help, but the testing and validation is completely > >opaque. If I wanted to know what that "OK!" actually meant, where > >do I go to find that out? > > This is actually something I want maintainers to dictate. What sort of > testing would make the XFS folks happy here? Right now I'm doing > "./check 'xfs/*'" with xfstests. Is it sufficient? Anything else you'd like to see? FWIW /me usually runs ./check '-g auto,quick,clone,dedupe,fsmap,rmap' with the following four mkfs configs: MKFS_OPTIONS='-m reflink=1,rmapbt=1, -i sparse=1, -b size=1024,' MKFS_OPTIONS='-m reflink=1,rmapbt=1, -i sparse=1,' MKFS_OPTIONS='-m crc=0,reflink=0,rmapbt=0, -i sparse=0,' MKFS_OPTIONS='-m crc=0,reflink=0,rmapbt=0, -i sparse=0, -b size=512,' Eventually I'll turn quotas on all the time too, time permitting. --D > > -- > Thanks, > Sasha-- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
