From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] New test and a fixup for blktests To: Omar Sandoval Cc: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" References: <9fd24bc2-cddc-6f46-230a-dc1673242a54@kernel.dk> <20170626204539.GD6710@vader.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <99056c08-07c3-5753-cea0-3e44affa435d@kernel.dk> <20170626210455.GE6710@vader.dhcp.thefacebook.com> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <52579416-9fde-8a6b-de60-b0378ab3333f@kernel.dk> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 15:05:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170626210455.GE6710@vader.dhcp.thefacebook.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 List-ID: On 06/26/2017 03:04 PM, Omar Sandoval wrote: > On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 03:02:55PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 06/26/2017 02:45 PM, Omar Sandoval wrote: >>> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 09:22:47AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>> Hi Omar, >>>> >>>> Two changes here: >>>> >>>> - block/006 wants to use the iops results, but it isn't using _fio_perf. >>>> - Add block/010 to test for shared vs non-shared tags performance. >>>> >>>> >>>> https://github.com/axboe/blktests.git axboe >>>> >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> Jens Axboe (2): >>>> block/006: use _fio_perf to get perf results >>>> block/010: add test case for shared/unshared tags >>>> >>>> tests/block/006 | 4 +-- >>>> tests/block/010 | 82 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> tests/block/010.out | 2 ++ >>>> 3 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>> create mode 100755 tests/block/010 >>>> create mode 100644 tests/block/010.out >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jens Axboe >>>> >>> >>> Thanks, Jens, applied the first one, but >>> >>> [ 1876.142470] null_blk: unknown parameter 'shared_tags' ignored >>> >>> Am I missing a patch? >> >> Yes, the shared tags is a new feature, it's coming in 4.13. But I checked >> and it doesn't abort the module load. So the test ends up just being the >> same thing run twice, if shared_tags isn't available. I figured that >> was good enough. > > Sounds good, I'll apply it as-is and add an extra patch on top that > checks if the module parameter exists. Awesome, extra cookie for you :-) -- Jens Axboe