From: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
To: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>,
"Nirjhar Roy (IBM)" <nirjhar.roy.lists@gmail.com>,
fstests@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
ojaswin@linux.ibm.com, djwong@kernel.org, zlang@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 4/5] check,common/config: Add support for central fsconfig
Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2025 23:00:17 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87mse4hd5i.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4c951390-400a-48ce-824c-f075a37496a9@oracle.com>
Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com> writes:
> On 10/1/25 17:10, Nirjhar Roy (IBM) wrote:
>> This adds support to pick and use any existing FS config from
>> configs/<fstype>/<config>. e.g.
>>
>> configs/xfs/1k
>> configs/xfs/4k
>> configs/ext4/4k
>> configs/ext4/64k
>>
>> This should help us maintain and test different fs test
>> configurations from a central place. We also hope that
>> this will be useful for both developers and testers to
>> look into what is being actively maintained and tested
>> by FS Maintainers.
>>
>> When we will have fsconfigs set, then will be another subdirectory created
>> in results/<section>. For example let's look at the following:
>>
>> The directory tree structure on running
>> sudo ./check -q 2 -R xunit-quiet -c xfs/4k,configs/xfs/1k selftest/001 selftest/007
>>
>
>
> The -c option check makes sense to me. Is it possible to get this
> feature implemented first while the -q option is still under discussion?
Hi Anand,
Thanks for trying the patches. The design of -c option is still under
discussion [1]. But it will be helpful if you could help us understand
your reasons for finding -c option useful :)
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/Z55RXUKB5O5l8QjM@li-dc0c254c-257c-11b2-a85c-98b6c1322444.ibm.com/
>
> That said, I have a suggestion for the -c option—
> Global config variables should be overridden by file system-specific
> config files.
>
> For example, if configs/localhost.config contains:
>
> MKFS_OPTIONS="--sectorsize 64K"
>
> but configs/<fstype>/some_config sets:
>
> MKFS_OPTIONS=""
>
> then the value from configs/<fstype>/some_config should take priority.
>
> I ran some tests with btrfs, and I don’t see this behavior happening yet.
I think that was intentional. I guess the reasoning was, we don't want to
break use cases for folks who still wanted to use local.config file
option.
However, in the new proposed design [2] we are thinking of having 1
large config per filesystem. e.g. configs/btrfs/config.btrfs which will
define all of the relevant sections e.g. btrfs_4k, btrfs_64k, ... Then
on invokking "make", it will generate a single large fs config file i.e.
configs/.all-sections-configs which will club all filesystems section
configs together.
Now when someone invokes check script with different -s options, it will
first look into local.config file, if local.config not found, then it
will look into configs/.all-sections-configs to get the relevant section
defines.
This hopefully should address all the other concerns which were raised
on the current central fs config design.
[2]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/87plj0hp7e.fsf@gmail.com/
-ritesh
>
> Thanks, Anand
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-01 17:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-10 9:10 [RFC 0/5] Add support for central fsconfig and -q <n> unconditional loop Nirjhar Roy (IBM)
2025-01-10 9:10 ` [RFC 1/5] tests/selftest: Add a new pseudo flaky test Nirjhar Roy (IBM)
2025-01-13 16:46 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-10 9:10 ` [RFC 2/5] check: Add -q <n> option to support unconditional looping Nirjhar Roy (IBM)
2025-01-10 16:08 ` Theodore Ts'o
2025-01-11 3:35 ` Ritesh Harjani
2025-01-10 9:10 ` [RFC 3/5] check: Improve pass/fail metrics and section config output Nirjhar Roy (IBM)
2025-01-10 9:10 ` [RFC 4/5] check,common/config: Add support for central fsconfig Nirjhar Roy (IBM)
2025-01-10 16:38 ` Theodore Ts'o
2025-02-20 9:56 ` Anand Jain
2025-03-01 17:30 ` Ritesh Harjani [this message]
2025-03-03 9:30 ` Anand Jain
2025-01-10 9:10 ` [RFC 5/5] configs: Add a couple of xfs and ext4 configuration templates Nirjhar Roy (IBM)
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=87mse4hd5i.fsf@gmail.com \
--to=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=anand.jain@oracle.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nirjhar.roy.lists@gmail.com \
--cc=ojaswin@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=zlang@kernel.org \
/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.