From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailout2.w1.samsung.com (mailout2.w1.samsung.com [210.118.77.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5C265BAEE for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 08:52:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=210.118.77.12 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705999966; cv=none; b=aCNo1p6kI5a5JiNUIYUXD/WXGrSq1vuVeXg5qn8n0fJibs/dRElyptGcn++XY3dm7iTQb7bvpwDW/qHKZFmovZ3iqiwvOEyBaJFqx9tN4HFq61u4DFVA4UqECgFLik5HleRbA30WaRKdJ1JfmlNrGqafNZwrXRhtZhtDa6spbx4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705999966; c=relaxed/simple; bh=zCMObol4b12cq/cEWDKuJLeayppKKIXxi/Yv2nee210=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:From:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:References; b=CVsWufHu3ql5oePLbEu5bgFojZRqLKY7zTYfcOhC2l+l3WVN22AjyG+iQbgv66GzjT7uoc9YocX0jkNgdg8b87JBKsK3c2l0Nr1PqcRAWqcYj8+TRQWCezsPGDUTeKnPG0Qg8e3YQkwJ6c7RF9hxmlWvZzvErj8tgYHczp4F2oU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=samsung.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=samsung.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=samsung.com header.i=@samsung.com header.b=DdIVAt9O; arc=none smtp.client-ip=210.118.77.12 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=samsung.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=samsung.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=samsung.com header.i=@samsung.com header.b="DdIVAt9O" Received: from eucas1p2.samsung.com (unknown [182.198.249.207]) by mailout2.w1.samsung.com (KnoxPortal) with ESMTP id 20240123085241euoutp02e834815e731a48a67aed5ea2fb23b326~s7e01r5qE1897718977euoutp02b for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 08:52:41 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mailout2.w1.samsung.com 20240123085241euoutp02e834815e731a48a67aed5ea2fb23b326~s7e01r5qE1897718977euoutp02b DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=samsung.com; s=mail20170921; t=1705999961; bh=fVyd12SgA25HZ/4Y6a3Pb/lWglH2MBlmPqT52L5l9a0=; h=Date:Subject:To:CC:From:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=DdIVAt9O7jcMdliU7+nn1+2AkD5QLqQG8n38o5P63R6kmBO1bSpKpTevsonUaJz/9 0czMKMXx1GeKPU1OAfKSWOhRAakTT/cWmdeC+NUhkyYO+Q14mUd8MVHfq9eAqGtRxv sOWd0tjy4tKRWR+C/PRWlBckViEXQvWNduBF7qEA= Received: from eusmges3new.samsung.com (unknown [203.254.199.245]) by eucas1p2.samsung.com (KnoxPortal) with ESMTP id 20240123085241eucas1p24a0275737fbe0bd314aaa0e4738a1d3b~s7e0rVo9e1254112541eucas1p2D; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 08:52:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from eucas1p2.samsung.com ( [182.198.249.207]) by eusmges3new.samsung.com (EUCPMTA) with SMTP id 7B.B4.09552.95E7FA56; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 08:52:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from eusmtrp2.samsung.com (unknown [182.198.249.139]) by eucas1p2.samsung.com (KnoxPortal) with ESMTPA id 20240123085241eucas1p20e4f3568f634213c469737b626f8ce64~s7e0SrWVD3053230532eucas1p2p; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 08:52:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from eusmgms2.samsung.com (unknown [182.198.249.180]) by eusmtrp2.samsung.com (KnoxPortal) with ESMTP id 20240123085241eusmtrp2457249366e4aa6c11531d119710801ba~s7e0R6laz0751907519eusmtrp2G; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 08:52:41 +0000 (GMT) X-AuditID: cbfec7f5-853ff70000002550-eb-65af7e59736e Received: from eusmtip2.samsung.com ( [203.254.199.222]) by eusmgms2.samsung.com (EUCPMTA) with SMTP id B1.7A.10702.95E7FA56; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 08:52:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from CAMSVWEXC02.scsc.local (unknown [106.1.227.72]) by eusmtip2.samsung.com (KnoxPortal) with ESMTPA id 20240123085241eusmtip2c7f634f940bcd39b29b89d87dc592259~s7e0F7fec1989719897eusmtip21; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 08:52:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.8.209] (106.210.248.230) by CAMSVWEXC02.scsc.local (2002:6a01:e348::6a01:e348) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 08:52:40 +0000 Message-ID: <69e73772-80e2-4cfe-a95d-d680d7686e3c@samsung.com> Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 09:52:39 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: fstests@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] fstest changes for LBS To: Dave Chinner , "Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)" CC: , , , , , , "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" Content-Language: en-US From: Pankaj Raghav In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: CAMSVWEXC01.scsc.local (2002:6a01:e347::6a01:e347) To CAMSVWEXC02.scsc.local (2002:6a01:e348::6a01:e348) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrKKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsWy7djP87qRdetTDZ4+0LbYcuweo8XlJ3wW p1v2slucefmZxWLXnx3sFjcmPGW0OHiqg91i78mdrA4cHqcWSXjsnHWX3WPTqk42j7MrHT3e 77vK5vF5k1wAWxSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXxsyLU1gLnnFVnFq0kLmB8TxHFyMnh4SAicSL138Z uxi5OIQEVjBK/Fm1nh3C+cIocfxhLzOE85lR4lfDRzaYloVfLjCD2EICyxklunbHwhVt/tbB AuHsZpR48fA/WAevgJ3E5XefwGwWAVWJ3ZcXsELEBSVOznzCAmKLCshL3L81gx3EFhbQl5i9 YRFQPQeHiECsxJ3VWSAzmQWOMEp8/P6aCaSGWUBc4taT+UwgNWwCWhKNnWCtnALGEn33zjFC lGhKtG7/zQ5hy0tsfzuHGaRcQkBZYupSL4hfaiVObbnFBDJeQqCfU+JKdzMLRMJF4sOqm6wQ trDEq+Nb2CFsGYn/O+czQdjVEk9v/GaGaG5hlOjfuZ4NYoG1RN+ZHIgaR4mXn74wQYT5JG68 FYQ4h09i0rbpzBMYVWchBcQsJI/NQvLBLCQfLGBkWcUonlpanJueWmycl1quV5yYW1yal66X nJ+7iRGYkk7/O/51B+OKVx/1DjEycTAeYpTgYFYS4b0huS5ViDclsbIqtSg/vqg0J7X4EKM0 B4uSOK9qinyqkEB6YklqdmpqQWoRTJaJg1OqgclxZ78t5/rSyLJJ813f7vi1IPzgwvWTdpiy zre0qjjOn5TwLH3akuacdzPm/K/4NnPhHTWWnL5dMbXvzlxOf7ri1o6GPsczv5Z6JZUzNxxY cXs3P6vYYvGwcwXGy6rirnoUX9H12rNe27j49YwChR0z3j/ZqFXXapLWGPu03fP1IWn+BVed ryw87trvvfLzku2WzGvid1tH5v09UPox/9Tpsu3aOkd6jRj+xB9ySl/urLh4ibqRnGmQ5zfz B7xelytS6jt/iSw6bfDB9pjta9ZpzZGvjf0Xs/x2O7048fSU+u1u1UcfKa0xOupy9Mo0Lxfu alXDUBWVFlOFRIEzZXferr9wUX3mtjOdxbMs2B2VWIozEg21mIuKEwE6aBEmuAMAAA== X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrNIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsVy+t/xe7qRdetTDTqm8VlsOXaP0eLyEz6L 0y172S3OvPzMYrHrzw52ixsTnjJaHDzVwW6x9+ROVgcOj1OLJDx2zrrL7rFpVSebx9mVjh7v 911l8/i8SS6ALUrPpii/tCRVISO/uMRWKdrQwkjP0NJCz8jEUs/Q2DzWyshUSd/OJiU1J7Ms tUjfLkEvY+bFKawFz7gqTi1ayNzAeJ6ji5GTQ0LARGLhlwvMXYxcHEICSxklzp9YwAqRkJHY +OUqlC0s8edaFxtE0UdGieaXf1khnN2MEkue72IEqeIVsJO4/O4TG4jNIqAqsfsyxCReAUGJ kzOfsIDYogLyEvdvzWAHsYUF9CVmb1gEVM/BISIQK3FndRbITGaBI4wSH7+/ZoJYsAvIWXIU bAGzgLjErSfzmUAa2AS0JBo7weZwChhL9N07B1WiKdG6/Tc7hC0vsf3tHGaQcgkBZYmpS70g nqmV+Pz3GeMERtFZSK6bhWTBLCSTZiGZtICRZRWjSGppcW56brGRXnFibnFpXrpecn7uJkZg LG879nPLDsaVrz7qHWJk4mA8xCjBwawkwntDcl2qEG9KYmVValF+fFFpTmrxIUZTYBBNZJYS Tc4HJpO8knhDMwNTQxMzSwNTSzNjJXFez4KORCGB9MSS1OzU1ILUIpg+Jg5OqQamtVp1cRoN VS4bn1f/vemcdyf5c6qE0ptPDdP9j8StnzXvkOtSzagXN/kVV894kpf46FffS423AVNiUnKF RN0Kdn6IUVY+8E2DmUvd4SnD//aFpR2vOdxe553zKk041f00u119s/rah5F8FyLLVwTLHjgw /+br7uS90+M6nWc4bubPPMjNGd9tn7yd4cyMLY0xK/edvXvo73+ZBaINzn/02pye3RbNPrFu t89E/eXrph/zeTVDPXPqWbdP1UllrGXNU7bbNj0VfFT/9+4l70jZ/6nTs58nXZrxsKcg1/pz Y/W7U8E2hcs1r012fmsuK687WWnu3qeTy3w2v73HqRqaYnDlUfQN+a4X7zkD2sWvKLEUZyQa ajEXFScCAJyBKepuAwAA X-CMS-MailID: 20240123085241eucas1p20e4f3568f634213c469737b626f8ce64 X-Msg-Generator: CA X-RootMTR: 20240123002508eucas1p16e632cbdbc7abf62fc1fde342bbaa3d6 X-EPHeader: CA CMS-TYPE: 201P X-CMS-RootMailID: 20240123002508eucas1p16e632cbdbc7abf62fc1fde342bbaa3d6 References: <20240122111751.449762-1-kernel@pankajraghav.com> 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 >> >> 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@pankajraghav.com/ >> >> 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? CCing Ritesh as I saw him post a patch to fix a testcase for 64k block size.