FS/XFS testing framework
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Theodore Tso" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Viacheslav Dubeyko <Slava.Dubeyko@ibm.com>,
	"fstests@vger.kernel.org" <fstests@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"slava@dubeyko.com" <slava@dubeyko.com>
Subject: Re: Should we consider disable generic/563 for file systems that do not support cgroup2?
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2026 12:52:50 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alz_HixXWhKTIfRV@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alzzQA9SR55FynDu@zlang-mailbox>

On Sun, Jul 19, 2026 at 11:57:04PM -0500, Zorro Lang wrote:
> Thank you for your reply. You are right. I was just listing some
> possible options, and I did not mean we must change the kernel for
> testing. Changing the kernel just for a _notrun is indeed not worth
> it. If there is no simple way to implement the _require_* function,
> we can `_exclude_fs hfs` directly :)

I wouldn't necessarily rule out changing the kernel so that file
systems can declare whether they can support cgroupv2.  The advantage
is that we wouldn't need to keep adding "_exclude_fs xxx" each time we
try to make fstets work on the simpler file systems.  It also means
that if a file system adds support for cgroupv2, we wouldn't need to
change fstests --- also, if the patch gets backported to an older
kernel (either an LTS or an enterprise distro kernel) we don't need to
try to modulate the _exclude_fs using kernel version numbers (which
isn't guaranteed to work given the backporting possibility).

This is a philosophical issue, and reasonable people could disagree on
this approach.  For my part, I created /sys/fs/ext4/features/*
precisely so that userspace (and fstests) so we can test if a
particular feature is available on a particular kernel.  Otherwise, a
test to see whether a particular feature "works" might have a false
positive if the feature is broken, and the way we test whether the
feature is present is basically what was accidentally broken with by a
regression.

Cheers,

					- Ted

  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-19 16:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-10 19:10 Should we consider disable generic/563 for file systems that do not support cgroup2? Viacheslav Dubeyko
2026-07-17 16:19 ` Zorro Lang
2026-07-17 17:42   ` Viacheslav Dubeyko
2026-07-19 14:02   ` Theodore Tso
2026-07-19 15:57     ` Zorro Lang
2026-07-19 16:52       ` Theodore Tso [this message]
2026-07-19 19:15         ` Zorro Lang
2026-07-20  8:07           ` Christoph Hellwig

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=alz_HixXWhKTIfRV@mit.edu \
    --to=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=Slava.Dubeyko@ibm.com \
    --cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=slava@dubeyko.com \
    /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