Re: [PATCH 0/2] fstest changes for LBS

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 09:52:39AM +0100, Pankaj Raghav wrote:
> On 23/01/2024 01:25, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 12:17:49PM +0100, Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) wrote:
> >> From: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> Some tests need to be adapted to for LBS[1] based on the filesystem
> >> blocksize. These are generic changes where it uses the filesystem
> >> blocksize instead of assuming it.
> >>
> >> There are some more generic test cases that are failing due to logdev
> >> size requirement that changes with filesystem blocksize. I will address
> >> them in a separate series.
> >>
> >> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230915183848.1018717-1-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> >>
> >> Pankaj Raghav (2):
> >>   xfs/558: scale blk IO size based on the filesystem blksz
> >>   xfs/161: adapt the test case for LBS filesystem
> > 
> > Do either of these fail and require fixing for a 64k page size
> > system running 64kB block size?
> > 
> > i.e. are these actual 64kB block size issues, or just issues with
> > the LBS patchset?
> > 
> 
> I had the same question in mind. Unfortunately, I don't have access to any 64k Page size
> machine at the moment. I will ask around if I can get access to it.
> 
> @Zorro I saw you posted a test report for 64k blocksize. Is it possible for you to
> see if these test cases(xfs/161, xfs/558) work in your setup with 64k block size?

Sure, I'll reserve one ppc64le and give it a try. But I remember there're more failed
cases on 64k blocksize xfs.

Thanks,
Zorro

> 
> CCing Ritesh as I saw him post a patch to fix a testcase for 64k block size.
> 





[Index of Archives]     [XFS Filesystem Development (older mail)]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux