From: Chuck Lever III <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Boyang Xue <bxue@redhat.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
"fstests@vger.kernel.org" <fstests@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] generic/476: requires 27GB scratch size
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2022 15:12:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E5C39D1E-3DB4-467A-8C6D-6630A2ADE97E@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YtlcwZ/66pJhpdiS@mit.edu>
> On Jul 21, 2022, at 10:03 AM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
>
> Following up, using NFS loopback with a 5GB scratch device on a Google
> Compute Engine VM, generic/476 passes using a 4.14 LTS, 4.19 LTS, and
> 5.4 LTS kernel. So this looks like it's a regression which is in 5.10
> LTS and newer kernels, and so instead of patching it out of the test,
> I think the right thing to do is to add it to a kernel
> version-specific exclude file and then filing a bug with the NFS
> folks.
Quite apart from the question of whether to exclude that test
rather than troubleshoot, I would like to state that testing NFS
in loopback, while possibly convenient for Q/A, is pretty fraught.
- Loopback means the client and server are part of the direct
reclaim path on the same system, which makes livelock or deadlock
much more likely. Given that these test systems are typically
small, that pushes the stack even further into this territory.
- Loopback means there's often no way to know which part of
the stack (client or server) is the problem.
Any NFS test needs to have no less than two test systems,
otherwise what you're really testing is how the system handles
memory exhaustion. An important test, no doubt, but it doesn't
paint a full picture.
--
Chuck Lever
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-21 15:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-21 2:29 [PATCH v1] generic/476: requires 27GB scratch size bxue
2022-07-21 2:49 ` xuyang2018.jy
2022-07-21 7:17 ` Boyang Xue
2022-07-21 4:40 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-07-21 7:26 ` Boyang Xue
2022-07-21 11:42 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-07-21 14:03 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-07-21 15:12 ` Chuck Lever III [this message]
2022-07-21 15:14 ` Chuck Lever III
2022-07-21 18:04 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-07-21 18:13 ` Chuck Lever III
2022-07-22 2:18 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-08-04 9:10 ` Boyang Xue
2022-07-21 15:29 ` Zorro Lang
2022-07-21 15:32 ` Chuck Lever III
2022-07-21 16:30 ` Zorro Lang
2022-07-21 18:25 ` Jeff Layton
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=E5C39D1E-3DB4-467A-8C6D-6630A2ADE97E@oracle.com \
--to=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=bxue@redhat.com \
--cc=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