All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@openvz.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, hch@lst.de,
	aelder@sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] xfstests: add fiemap operation to fsstress
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 12:05:59 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111103160559.GB15045@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87wrbhxya6.fsf@dmbot.sw.ru>

On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 03:04:17PM +0400, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2011 06:54:16 -0400, Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> > 
> > On Nov 2, 2011, at 3:55 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > 
> > > Alex, Eric, Dave - should we add new tests with the new operations
> > > Dmitry added, or is adding new ops to the existing tests fine?
> > 
> > One argument for adding new ops to existing tests is that it makes
> > the run time of the entire test suite take longer.  A QA pass is
> > already taking quite a while, and it would be nice if we could
> > keep xfstests as efficient as possible in terms of the maximum
> > testing coverage per time spent running the test suite….
>
> Yes, but regression test with explicit seed option should be
> preserved. Number of such test is not too big, so it is reasonable to
> hardcode set of operations in such tests and let all others use new features.

That's not what I was talking about.  Of course there should be a way
to run a regression test with an explicit seed option (although in
general I think a specific test in xfstests should by default use a
random seed, and have a way to easily specify an explicit seed without
having to reverse engineer the test and running fsstress manually).

What I was talking about was the fact we already have several (half a
dozen or so, if memory serves correctly) xfstests that use fsstress
with a different set of fsstress options.  In some cases it makes to
add a new numbered xfstest subtest, but I'd rather not find that we've
doubled the number of tests using fsstress in the future, and with it,
doubled the run-time of the auto or quick xfstests group....

	    	     	    	    - Ted

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@openvz.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, aelder@sgi.com, hch@lst.de,
	xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] xfstests: add fiemap operation to fsstress
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 12:05:59 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111103160559.GB15045@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87wrbhxya6.fsf@dmbot.sw.ru>

On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 03:04:17PM +0400, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2011 06:54:16 -0400, Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> > 
> > On Nov 2, 2011, at 3:55 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > 
> > > Alex, Eric, Dave - should we add new tests with the new operations
> > > Dmitry added, or is adding new ops to the existing tests fine?
> > 
> > One argument for adding new ops to existing tests is that it makes
> > the run time of the entire test suite take longer.  A QA pass is
> > already taking quite a while, and it would be nice if we could
> > keep xfstests as efficient as possible in terms of the maximum
> > testing coverage per time spent running the test suite….
>
> Yes, but regression test with explicit seed option should be
> preserved. Number of such test is not too big, so it is reasonable to
> hardcode set of operations in such tests and let all others use new features.

That's not what I was talking about.  Of course there should be a way
to run a regression test with an explicit seed option (although in
general I think a specific test in xfstests should by default use a
random seed, and have a way to easily specify an explicit seed without
having to reverse engineer the test and running fsstress manually).

What I was talking about was the fact we already have several (half a
dozen or so, if memory serves correctly) xfstests that use fsstress
with a different set of fsstress options.  In some cases it makes to
add a new numbered xfstest subtest, but I'd rather not find that we've
doubled the number of tests using fsstress in the future, and with it,
doubled the run-time of the auto or quick xfstests group....

	    	     	    	    - Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2011-11-03 16:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-10-29  0:48 [PATCH 0/8] xfstests: Bunch of new stress tests -v3 Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48 ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48 ` [PATCH 1/8] xfstests: fsstress dump inode info when possible Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48   ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48 ` [PATCH 2/8] xfstests: add different logging option to fsstress Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48   ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48 ` [PATCH 3/8] xfstests: fsstress should kill children tasks before exit Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48   ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48 ` [PATCH 4/8] xfstests: add fallocate support to fsstress Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48   ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48 ` [PATCH 5/8] xfstests: fsstress add FS_IOC_{SET, GET}FLAGS operations v2 Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48   ` [PATCH 5/8] xfstests: fsstress add FS_IOC_{SET,GET}FLAGS " Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48 ` [PATCH 6/8] xfstests: add fiemap operation to fsstress Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48   ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-11-02 19:55   ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-02 19:55     ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-03  9:34     ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-11-03  9:34       ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-11-03 12:14       ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-11-03 12:14         ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-11-03 12:28         ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-03 12:28           ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-03 10:54     ` Theodore Tso
2011-11-03 10:54       ` Theodore Tso
2011-11-03 11:04       ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-11-03 11:04         ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-11-03 16:05         ` Ted Ts'o [this message]
2011-11-03 16:05           ` Ted Ts'o
2011-10-29  0:48 ` [PATCH 7/8] xfstests: add a new test that runs fsstress under ENOSPC conditions Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48   ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-11-02 19:53   ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-02 19:53     ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-02 20:36     ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-11-02 20:36       ` Dmitry Monakhov
2011-11-02 21:06       ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-02 21:06         ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-29  0:48 ` [PATCH 8/8] xfstests: add a new quota " Dmitry Monakhov
2011-10-29  0:48   ` Dmitry Monakhov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20111103160559.GB15045@thunk.org \
    --to=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=aelder@sgi.com \
    --cc=dmonakhov@openvz.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.