From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>
Cc: "Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)" <kernel@pankajraghav.com>,
zlang@redhat.com, fstests@vger.kernel.org, mcgrof@kernel.org,
gost.dev@samsung.com, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs/558: scale blk IO size based on the filesystem blksz
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 13:08:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240313200834.GP1927156@frogsfrogsfrogs> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cb8a9359-6678-4692-a76c-545f8bb44b00@samsung.com>
On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 06:23:16PM +0100, Pankaj Raghav wrote:
> On 22/01/2024 17:53, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 12:17:50PM +0100, Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) wrote:
> >> From: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>
> >>
> >> This test fails for >= 64k filesystem block size on a 4k PAGE_SIZE
> >> system(see LBS efforts[1]). Scale the `blksz` based on the filesystem
> > > Fails how, specifically?
>
> I basically get this in 558.out.bad when I set filesystem block size to be 64k:
> QA output created by 558
> Expected to hear about writeback iomap invalidations?
> Silence is golden
>
> But I do see that iomap invalidations are happening for 16k and 32k, which makes it pass
> the test for those block sizes.
>
> My suspicion was that we don't see any invalidations because of the blksz fixed
> at 64k in the test, which will contain one FSB in the case of 64k block size.
>
> Let me know if I am missing something.
Nope, that sounds good and fixes the problems I saw. So:
Tested-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
And if you add to the commit message that this test specifically fixes
the "Expected to hear about writeback iomap invalidations?" message for
64k filesystems, then:
Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
--D
> >
> > --D
> >
> >> block size instead of fixing it as 64k so that we do get some iomap
> >> invalidations while doing concurrent writes.
> >>
> >> Cap the blksz to be at least 64k to retain the same behaviour as before
> >> for smaller filesystem blocksizes.
> >>
> >> [1] LBS effort: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230915183848.1018717-1-kernel@pankajraghav.com/
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>
> >> ---
> >> tests/xfs/558 | 7 ++++++-
> >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/tests/xfs/558 b/tests/xfs/558
> >> index 9e9b3be8..270f458c 100755
> >> --- a/tests/xfs/558
> >> +++ b/tests/xfs/558
> >> @@ -127,7 +127,12 @@ _scratch_mount >> $seqres.full
> >> $XFS_IO_PROG -c 'chattr -x' $SCRATCH_MNT &> $seqres.full
> >> _require_pagecache_access $SCRATCH_MNT
> >>
> >> -blksz=65536
> >> +min_blksz=65536
> >> +file_blksz=$(_get_file_block_size "$SCRATCH_MNT")
> >> +blksz=$(( 8 * $file_blksz ))
> >> +
> >> +blksz=$(( blksz > min_blksz ? blksz : min_blksz ))
> >> +
> >> _require_congruent_file_oplen $SCRATCH_MNT $blksz
> >>
> >> # Make sure we have sufficient extent size to create speculative CoW
> >> --
> >> 2.43.0
> >>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-13 20:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-22 11:17 [PATCH 0/2] fstest changes for LBS Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-01-22 11:17 ` [PATCH 1/2] xfs/558: scale blk IO size based on the filesystem blksz Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-01-22 16:53 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-01-22 17:23 ` Pankaj Raghav
2024-03-13 20:08 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2024-01-22 11:17 ` [PATCH 2/2] xfs/161: adapt the test case for LBS filesystem Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)
2024-01-22 16:57 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-01-22 17:32 ` Pankaj Raghav
2024-01-25 16:06 ` Pankaj Raghav
2024-01-23 0:25 ` [PATCH 0/2] fstest changes for LBS Dave Chinner
2024-01-23 8:52 ` Pankaj Raghav
2024-01-23 13:43 ` Zorro Lang
2024-01-23 15:39 ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-01-23 16:33 ` Pankaj Raghav
2024-01-23 15:35 ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-01-23 16:40 ` Pankaj Raghav
2024-01-23 19:42 ` Ritesh Harjani
2024-01-23 20:21 ` Pankaj Raghav
2024-01-24 16:58 ` Darrick J. Wong
2024-01-24 21:06 ` Pankaj Raghav
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=20240313200834.GP1927156@frogsfrogsfrogs \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gost.dev@samsung.com \
--cc=kernel@pankajraghav.com \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=p.raghav@samsung.com \
--cc=zlang@redhat.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