Hi Cyril,
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 1:28 PM Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > I'm starting to wonder if we should start tracking minimal FS size per
> > > filesystem since btrfs and xfs will likely to continue to grow and with
> > > that we will end up disabling the whole fs related testing on embedded
> > > boards with a little disk space. If we tracked that per filesystem we
> > > would be able to skip a subset of filesystems when there is not enough
> > > space. The downside is obviously that we would have to add a bit more
> > > complexity to the test library.
> >
> > Maybe I could for start rewrite v2 (I've sent it without Cc kernel devs now it's
> > mainly LTP internal thing) as it just to have 300 MB for XFS and 256 MB for the
> > rest. That would require to specify filesystem when acquiring device (NULL would
> > be for the default filesystem), that's would be worth if embedded folks counter
> > each MB. It'd be nice to hear from them.
>
> The 256MB limit was set previously due to btrfs, I bet that we can
> create smaller images for ext filesytems for example.
Yeah, we used to have ext2 root file systems that fit on 1440 KiB floppies.
IIRC, ext3 does have a minimum size of 32 MiB or so.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
