Re: [PATCH] ext4/046: skip test when ext4 doesn't support bs < ps with dioread_nolock

[Eryu Guan <guaneryu@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 11:55:03AM +0800, Yang Xu wrote:
> When testing arm machine, this case fails because ps > bs and kernel doesn't
> introduced commit c8cc88163f40 ("ext4: Add support for blocksize < pagesize in dioread_nolock").
> Only skip this case when mounting failed.

Perhaps it's the kernel that should be fixed? i.e. backport the
mentioned patch? Depends on if we treat it as a bug or a feature I
think..

> 
> Signed-off-by: Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
>  tests/ext4/046 | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/ext4/046 b/tests/ext4/046
> index 5524024e..e307cbf1 100755
> --- a/tests/ext4/046
> +++ b/tests/ext4/046
> @@ -37,7 +37,8 @@ _require_xfs_io_command "falloc"
>  _require_scratch_size $((6 * 1024 * 1024)) #kB
>  
>  _scratch_mkfs >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> -_scratch_mount "-o dioread_nolock" >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +_try_scratch_mount "-o dioread_nolock" >>$seqres.full 2>&1 || \
> +	_notrun "mount failed, ext4 doesn't support bs < ps with dioread_nolock?"

At least we should check if it's really the bs < ps case before _notrun
the test, otherwise we may fail to find dioread_nolock mount regression.

Thanks,
Eryu

>  
>  # Get blksz
>  blksz=$(_get_file_block_size $SCRATCH_MNT)
> -- 
> 2.23.0
> 
>