From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] common: check if the scratch device can support 1024 block sizes
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 08:45:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231023154513.GF11391@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231022215529.2202150-2-tytso@mit.edu>
On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 05:55:28PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> If the scratch device has as logical blocksize larger than 512 --- for
> example, some SSD or HDD's may have a 4k logical blocksize, and so
> will not support a file system with a 1k block size.
>
> Add a new function, _require_scratch_support_blocksize so we can skip
> tests that use _scratch_mkfs_blocksized with a size less than the
> scratch device's logical block size.
>
> Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
> ---
> common/rc | 12 ++++++++++++
> tests/ext4/055 | 1 +
> tests/xfs/205 | 1 +
> tests/xfs/432 | 1 +
> tests/xfs/516 | 1 +
> 5 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc
> index 7f5a9527c..8d7179567 100644
> --- a/common/rc
> +++ b/common/rc
> @@ -1124,6 +1124,9 @@ _scratch_mkfs_blocksized()
> if [ $blocksize -lt $(_get_page_size) ]; then
> _exclude_scratch_mount_option dax
> fi
> + if [ $blocksize -lt $(blockdev --getss $SCRATCH_DEV) ]; then
> + _require_scratch_support_blocksize "$blocksize"
> + fi
This duplicates the logic in _require_scratch_support_blocksize, so I
think you can drop it.
>
> case $FSTYP in
> btrfs)
> @@ -4452,6 +4455,15 @@ _get_device_size()
> echo $(($(blockdev --getsz $1) >> 1))
> }
>
> +_require_scratch_support_blocksize()
> +{
> + local blocksize=$1
> +
> + if [ $blocksize -lt $(blockdev --getss $SCRATCH_DEV) ]; then
> + _notrun "$SCRATCH_DEV does not support a block size of $blocksize."
"block" is a bit vague in this context -- you mean the LBA size, not the
internal physical block size, right?
May I suggest "...does not support an LBA size of $blocksize." ?
--D
> + fi
> +}
> +
> # Make sure we actually have dmesg checking set up.
> _require_check_dmesg()
> {
> diff --git a/tests/ext4/055 b/tests/ext4/055
> index aa15cfe98..7025f6283 100755
> --- a/tests/ext4/055
> +++ b/tests/ext4/055
> @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ echo "Silence is golden"
>
> # The 1K blocksize is designed for debugfs.
> _exclude_scratch_mount_option dax
> +_require_scratch_support_blocksize 1024
> _scratch_mkfs "-F -O quota -b 1024" > $seqres.full 2>&1
>
> # Start from 0, fill block 1 with 6,replace the original 2.
> diff --git a/tests/xfs/205 b/tests/xfs/205
> index 104f1f45a..84c099208 100755
> --- a/tests/xfs/205
> +++ b/tests/xfs/205
> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ _require_scratch_nocheck
> unset SCRATCH_RTDEV
>
> fsblksz=1024
> +_require_scratch_support_blocksize $fsblksz
> _scratch_mkfs_xfs -d size=$((32768*fsblksz)) -b size=$fsblksz >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> _scratch_mount
>
> diff --git a/tests/xfs/432 b/tests/xfs/432
> index 66315b039..2efa6230b 100755
> --- a/tests/xfs/432
> +++ b/tests/xfs/432
> @@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ echo "Format and mount"
> # block. 8187 hashes/dablk / 248 dirents/dirblock = ~33 dirblocks per
> # dablock. 33 dirblocks * 64k mean that we can expand a directory by
> # 2112k before we have to allocate another da btree block.
> +_require_scratch_support_blocksize 1024
> _scratch_mkfs -b size=1k -n size=64k > "$seqres.full" 2>&1
> _scratch_mount >> "$seqres.full" 2>&1
>
> diff --git a/tests/xfs/516 b/tests/xfs/516
> index 9e1b99317..65fc635dd 100755
> --- a/tests/xfs/516
> +++ b/tests/xfs/516
> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ _cleanup()
> # real QA test starts here
> _supported_fs xfs
> _require_scratch_nocheck
> +_require_scratch_support_blocksize 1024
>
> # Assume that if we can run scrub on the test dev we can run it on the scratch
> # fs too.
> --
> 2.31.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-23 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-22 21:55 [PATCH 0/2] Fix test failures caused by storage devcies with 4k sectors Theodore Ts'o
2023-10-22 21:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] common: check if the scratch device can support 1024 block sizes Theodore Ts'o
2023-10-23 15:45 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2023-10-23 19:48 ` Theodore Ts'o
2023-10-22 21:55 ` [PATCH 2/2] generic/563: create the loop dev with the same block size as the scratch dev Theodore Ts'o
2023-10-23 15:54 ` Darrick J. Wong
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=20231023154513.GF11391@frogsfrogsfrogs \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox