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=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=no 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 2C333C55194 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 09:34:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15B0720736 for ; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 09:34:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726765AbgDXJeG (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Apr 2020 05:34:06 -0400 Received: from out30-45.freemail.mail.aliyun.com ([115.124.30.45]:47858 "EHLO out30-45.freemail.mail.aliyun.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726628AbgDXJeG (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Apr 2020 05:34:06 -0400 X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R721e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=e01e01355;MF=jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=4;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0TwVqLjy_1587720843; Received: from localhost(mailfrom:jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0TwVqLjy_1587720843) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1); Fri, 24 Apr 2020 17:34:04 +0800 From: Jeffle Xu To: fstests@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com, Jeffle Xu Subject: [PATCH RFC 0/2] fsx: make fsx perceptive to cluster size Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 17:33:48 +0800 Message-Id: <1587720830-11955-1-git-send-email-jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.8.3.1 Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Offset and size should be aligned with cluster_size when inserting or collapsing range on ext4 with 'bigalloc' enabled. Currently fsx only align offset/size with block size. In fact I have no idea which is the best way to fix this isue. On one hand, fsx should be general and has no knowledge of the underlying filesystem. Besides the cluster size seems to be stored on ext4_super_block and there's no easy way to get it. But on the oter hand, quite many tests call fsx directly, e.g., generic/127, rather than the generic routine run_fsx() defined in common/rc. Jeffle Xu (2): xfstests: fsx: add support for cluster size xfstests: common/rc: add cluster size support for ext4 common/rc | 9 +++++++++ ltp/fsx.c | 20 ++++++++++++++------ 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) -- 1.8.3.1