From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76F323BB38; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 20:43:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710880989; cv=none; b=P8RV3WwUSR3+LR7v+woapY71eTyr4+d4IlR/rT6TX0WBGPLc8oaQ5fMiid1ablp4KhL24lpBXUYbWWzYWCAfoYC0eMNEjTh3lofpkJFmysEU/yi8S0bNoe5YS0nU9a/qs2B85vgtsKAMFjDhhHdc511odAju4xasSL2AwKUMAFI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710880989; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QkswPpgOtXXFNcDeCoeEx1SieVgPGMW3NjoP3EmstgE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=o/xfL+hTeLaBQKpTeDZaY541ya9PJk75tvTnRXOgXgBtL8YnxuuldeXo1nYTcrlk3+pB3KuLfn+VFzk3P7qx7vNVcrOEjzJ+O/3VMsYzslkHmg5dXtb3LidFLL/MdNGnRvAGx2fExRFU+yxO+7g5uLxvN/mGG9RIn7MXxX6nRFk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=nFm1XFCl; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="nFm1XFCl" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding :Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=rYtbm5+pkm2dKroe0uH9xBfAGU8+RFH65jr8MzNOzaE=; b=nFm1XFCl4gKjulVBLv6C51RtOj Inn9FOwWxNkigQ5QTmS22NunMtOtEKn2JoqhAcIoCvdlvasVxJVsPswi6ebwrxgOunVGoY7wD0y/I rhFSoZ4Z/AtfJ73t38C/xnztrZh0k1SuXkUBDyBq6zzYEz6N05QLN2hbNFptX92jMOi7YEJb05FAs F/KCwrYVgNknBEJNGxMl1C90XaeTIvZ5Brk5tRM6sHXLHVydOK+AGLQgH5MI0eBHwvvMbzR8qejqR jpVrzUyf64GjR74klgqMZSxG1iaOLJQUK8TK7Od3/aidHxKlYyhplr5N4R9WbuvuhfSSYE7wNZ0bj ANwXv2yQ==; Received: from hch by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rmgIa-0000000EA05-04M2; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 20:43:04 +0000 Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 13:43:03 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Zorro Lang Cc: David Sterba , Anand Jain , fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, fdmanana@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] shared: move btrfs clone device testcase to the shared group Message-ID: References: <440eff6d16407f12ec55df69db283ba6eb9b278c.1710599671.git.anand.jain@oracle.com> <20240318220219.GI16737@twin.jikos.cz> <20240319041633.l75ifryeidjxltat@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: fstests@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20240319041633.l75ifryeidjxltat@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com> X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 12:16:33PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote: > I didn't suggest to make it a shared case directly, I asked if there's a > _require_xxxx helper to make this case notrun on "not proper" fs, not > just use "btrfs ext4" to be whitelist : > > https://lore.kernel.org/fstests/20240312044629.hpaqdkl24nxaa3dv@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com/ > > In my personal opinion, the "shared" directory is a place to store the cases > which are nearly to be generic, but not ready. It's a place to remind us > there're still some cases use something likes "supported btrfs ext4" as the > hard condition of _notrun, rather than a flexible _require_xxx helper. These > cases in shared better to be moved to generic, if we can improve it in one day. > > It more likes a "TODO" list of generic. If we just write it in generic/ > directory, I'm afraid we'll leave it in hundreds of generic cases then forget it. > > What do you think? I like we're you're going, but I'd like to take it a step further: I think we should just kill _supported_fs entirely. tests/$FSTYPE is run for $FSTYP only, period. tests/generic/ is run for all file systems, and run/notrun deciѕions should be based on feature checks. Where they can't happen without fs-sepcific infrastructure we need a _require/_have check that switches on $FSTYP like we already have in many places. shared should be folded into generic. And a list of all hte places where we have to or should plug fs knowledge in would be really nice as well..