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

[Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>]

Hi Eryu
> 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..
IMO, it is a feature instead of a bug.
>
>>
>> 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.
Ok. Will send v2.
>
> Thanks,
> Eryu
>
>>
>>   # Get blksz
>>   blksz=$(_get_file_block_size $SCRATCH_MNT)
>> --
>> 2.23.0
>>
>>
>
>
> .
>