From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC7E4C282CA for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 18:11:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC62A20811 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 18:11:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2404813AbfBMSLR (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2019 13:11:17 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-f196.google.com ([209.85.214.196]:39012 "EHLO mail-pl1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2393586AbfBMSLR (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2019 13:11:17 -0500 Received: by mail-pl1-f196.google.com with SMTP id 101so1552356pld.6; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 10:11:17 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=FIPAyucGiQMJurC7Aq4B7eYrtOEcVyV8crP9SpRksUM=; b=B9o8ETx4jIN8AAQlJ7G5om0o++CoGAPq8FsbDuaU/N1yuys6j1u45RBU7713QvWDbR cbyJZcNz2CuzJumJfoS64YhxIrzX5YD6ezTK9/YsUKS6lyHM14HdPoGKNxek3CKlh0wj hGeBo0F6HbxuAMG9pWJRVBBebTlhetuXdufYkovIa2bssUh+IN3oOAZcMmcQ5m78Hvam t/7cmxeKlemfwevb807lfMEb7TAJwIHZqojp0rXTloal3NauyVXK6q8d30SJnTYV8K5q yH0Qp4uxLXZWooLo+2NL6w+wTm8WoDy0Ww5c27bpMU+jXKGuHzJejT2jUT8m8ZoyKYu3 TJcw== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuaeh/BX58sxyLPhZdjHCkQNKFcrPW6WUmQ9EWaa1ruFmSHhVxyN wnfibDY6yFTv+/C8inbPGMw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IZxNXloh2GZfRU90weMnf+INv5zObqqEkeNdlvbgLbJ3MWbto/TiafXKOwWiWmC/TYDD0buIA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:145:: with SMTP id 63mr1753603plb.256.1550081476460; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 10:11:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2620:15c:2cd:203:5cdc:422c:7b28:ebb5? ([2620:15c:2cd:203:5cdc:422c:7b28:ebb5]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h15sm21613325pgl.43.2019.02.13.10.11.15 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 13 Feb 2019 10:11:15 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1550081474.19311.62.camel@acm.org> Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] : blktests: status, an expansion plan for the storage stack test framework From: Bart Van Assche To: Chaitanya Kulkarni , "lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org" Cc: Jens Axboe , "hare@suse.de" , "hch@infradead.org" , "jack@suse.cz" , "jthumshirn@suse.de" , "keith.busch@intel.com" , "martin.petersen@oracle.com" , "ming.lei@redhat.com" , "osandov@fb.com" , "tytso@mit.edu" , Sagi Grimberg , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2019 10:11:14 -0800 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-7" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.26.2-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2019-02-06 at 05:21 +-0000, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote: +AD4 For storage track, we would like to propose a session dedicated to blktests. It is a great +AD4 opportunity for the storage developers to gather and have a discussion about:- +AD4 +AD4 1. Current status of the blktests framework. +AD4 2. Any new/missing features that we want to add in the blktests. +AD4 3. Any new kernel features that could be used to make testing easier? +AD4 E.g. Implementing new features in the null+AF8-blk.c in order to have device +AD4 independent complete test coverage. (e.g. adding discard command for null+AF8-blk or any +AD4 other specific REQ+AF8-OP). Discussion about having any new tracepoint events in the block layer. +AD4 4. Any new test cases/categories which are lacking in the blktests framework. Hi Chaitanya, Thanks for having proposed this topic. I'd like to add a fifth item to the agenda, namely blktests maintainership. The following could e.g. be discussed: - How many maintainers should the blktests project have? A single maintainer or also one or more co-maintainers? - Is it acceptable that patches get accepted in the blktests repository that break the continuous integration tests? If so, why do we even have continuous integration tests? See also +ACIAWw-PATCH+AF0 Unbreak the continuous integration build+ACI (https://marc.info/?l+AD0-linux-block+ACY-m+AD0-154990323618159). - How long should it take before a blktests maintainer provides feedback on blktests patches and pull requests? Is it considered acceptable that it takes more than four weeks to process a pull request that is in perfect shape? See e.g. https://github.com/osandov/blktests/pull/44. Bart.