Re: [PATCH for-next v4 0/5] null_blk: improve write failure simulation

[Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@nvidia.com>]

Replying to my own email :-

On 1/21/25 17:01, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
> On 1/21/25 00:15, Shin'ichiro Kawasaki wrote:
>> Currently, null_blk has 'badblocks' parameter to simulate IO failures
>> for broken blocks. This helps checking if userland tools can handle IO
>> failures. However, this badblocks feature has two differences from the
>> IO failures on real storage devices. Firstly, when write operations fail
>> for the badblocks, null_blk does not write any data, while real storage
>> devices sometimes do partial data write. Secondly, null_blk always make
>> write operations fail for the specified badblocks, while real storage
>> devices can recover the bad blocks so that next write operations can
>> succeed after failure. Hence, real storage devices are required to check
>> if userland tools support such partial writes or bad blocks recovery.
>>
>> This series improves write failure simulation by null_blk to allow
>> checking userland tools without real storage devices. The first patch
>> is a preparation to make new feature addition simpler. The second patch
>> introduces the 'badblocks_once' parameter to simulate bad blocks
>> recovery. The third patch fixes a bug, and the fourth patch adds a
>> function argument to prepare for the fifth patch. The fifth patch adds
>> the partial IO support and introduces the 'badblocks_partial_io'
>> parameter.
>

For the whole series :-

> Looks good.
>
> Reviewed-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>
>
> -ck
>
>