From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: Matthew Bobrowski <repnop@google.com>,
Dominique Leuenberger <dimstar@opensuse.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, LTP List <ltp@lists.linux.it>
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/fanotify10: Make evictable marks test more reliable
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2022 19:42:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YwpXi/lLcl0Tm3f4@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxjMo-sm060G-80ic-+p1UvwUpzFJsO3ecOKVRKyoQ_wxg@mail.gmail.com>
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 1:09 AM Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 5:19 PM Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
> > > > On Fri 26-08-22 15:12:14, Petr Vorel wrote:
> > > > > Hi Jan, all,
> > > > > > In some setups evictable marks tests are failing because the inode with
> > > > > > evictable mark does not get evicted. Make sure we sync the filesystem
> > > > > > before we try to drop caches to increase likelyhood the inode will get
> > > > > > evicted.
> > > > > Merged with minor changes to keep checkpatch.pl happy.
> > > > Thanks!
> > > > > Given on previous discussion the behavior on ext2 vs. xfs:
> > > > > would it make sense to transform the test to use .all_filesystems = 1 ?
> > > On the contrary.
> > > We want the inode reclaim to be as predictable as possible.
> > > That is why I suggested to force the test to use ext2
> > > because xfs has some specialized inode reclaim
> > Ah right! Could you please send a patch with .dev_fs_type = "ext2"
> > That should be enough I guess.
> Petr, I don't think there is a need for that.
> I was only pointing out the different fs can have different inode
> reclaim behaviors.
> I had not encountered issues when testing fanotify10 on xfs myself.
> Jan's patch should be enough and then the test can run
> on the user's choice of filesystem, which is always better than
> unneeded restrictions.
> If we see issues on xfs we can reconsider .dev_fs_type = "ext2".
Amir, thanks for explanation. Makes sense.
Kind regards,
Petr
> Thanks,
> Amir.
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-27 17:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-25 14:03 [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/fanotify10: Make evictable marks test more reliable Jan Kara
2022-08-26 13:12 ` Petr Vorel
2022-08-26 14:19 ` Jan Kara
2022-08-26 21:13 ` Amir Goldstein
2022-08-26 22:09 ` Petr Vorel
2022-08-27 7:31 ` Amir Goldstein
2022-08-27 17:42 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
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=YwpXi/lLcl0Tm3f4@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=dimstar@opensuse.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
--cc=repnop@google.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.