From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87A3734029D; Tue, 21 Oct 2025 14:49:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761058161; cv=none; b=kp28kG2bauaVa2cI9IZ1FEUOkDSHTK5TOCHsytPqZ+vYu6wbdb2Zwhbk2CfOJd56yjqS952AjiMDRMO1bEY8smbxhdhYZeQ73ZBVG2TSc387J0PbQqz47fA8zd5JJw6TLX4K6Be5u72J2UvEurRqAykxVqIg/p6V7t5Wq2yzfSA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761058161; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YIFVVDZlVutCfPBrVpQ6UPbWPq4Gs7+P0hr88XbNjj8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=DVUNw14RjiGElQ+pn8x2hXxQE7i3wLerk1qgMWSd5J4RG9LBDK2+dopufZGdSrfQnG99b/YK0DHk2LUPA89dMfW9q2PYpug+oIC+awZ8TlLbjCOB9FiAB6kVicusBQZp/kU9gaK4DHlhMBn9FaW0z5XC0FJ/O7QsRTVEoxLhNi4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Lc4AP85R; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Lc4AP85R" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 21C36C4CEF5; Tue, 21 Oct 2025 14:49:21 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1761058161; bh=YIFVVDZlVutCfPBrVpQ6UPbWPq4Gs7+P0hr88XbNjj8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Lc4AP85RXUsFVQRbUv5ZeD9uWxo4kImmq1uVqiwvQWhmBu4mW/uNKdjADaB1ECMRj oga9n5JXCgpKZxx7XnD7h+UovXUpyg03t3gjgFzwM/r5ODLjsMTQsjZ3Y0hAAsvwdl +j0lDFc5+v1u8bdwq37r575vI6NnKZNcKnp561ntK+RfLR12wZ23WjeA0MRoiBcYT5 odi+vklo0iA1tTymQq3+0lZjBUhvimjExSA2JC/j1VfAGzWpV0+knoDx1Frk2mNizX D+LGXpojFL+WS2QGkxjhdgr+UrmeOKuF24rZa1ZziAleYrKmaZ+enmJ6r8PI3SXp3q xWb7XXbB7LEEw== Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2025 07:49:20 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Johannes Thumshirn Cc: Zorro Lang , hch , Naohiro Aota , "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" , Hans Holmberg , "fstests@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org" , Carlos Maiolino , Carlos Maiolino Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] generic: basic smoke for filesystems on zoned block devices Message-ID: <20251021144920.GH3356773@frogsfrogsfrogs> References: <20251016152032.654284-1-johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com> <20251016152032.654284-4-johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com> <20251017185633.pvpapg5gq47s2vmm@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com> <0d05cde5-024b-4136-ad51-9a56361f4b51@wdc.com> <20251018140518.2xlpmmqajgaeg7xq@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com> <8253d6b9-e98b-4a05-80c0-f255ec32ee38@wdc.com> <16e539fe-b9f0-4645-b135-3930df249eab@wdc.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <16e539fe-b9f0-4645-b135-3930df249eab@wdc.com> On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 09:33:05AM +0000, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > On 10/20/25 8:21 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > > On 10/18/25 4:05 PM, Zorro Lang wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 18, 2025 at 11:13:03AM +0000, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > >>> On 10/17/25 8:56 PM, Zorro Lang wrote: > >>>> Does this mean the current FSTYP doesn't support zoned? > >>>> > >>>> As this's a generic test case, the FSTYP can be any other filesystems, likes > >>>> nfs, cifs, overlay, exfat, tmpfs and so on, can we create zloop on any of them? > >>>> If not, how about _notrun if current FSTYP doesn't support. > >>> I did that in v1 and got told that I shouldn't do this. > >> This's your V1, right? > >> https://lore.kernel.org/fstests/20251007041321.GA15727@lst.de/T/#u > >> > >> Which line is "_notrun if current FSTYP doesn't support zloop creation"? And where is > >> the message that told you don't to that? Could you provides more details, I'd like > >> to learn about more, thanks :) > > Ah sh*t, it was a non public 1st version. It had a check like this: > > > > > > _require_zoned_support() > > { > >     case "$FSTYP" > >     btrfs) > >         test -f /sys/fs/btrfs/features/zoned > >         ;; > >     f2fs) > >         test -f /sys/fs/f2fs/features/blkzoned > >         ;; > >     xfs) > >         true > >         ;; > >     *) > >         false > >         ;; > >     esac > > > > } > > > > But as xfs doesn't have a features sysfs entry Christoph said, it'll be > > better to just _try_mkfs and see if there are any errors. > > > > > Zorro, > > Should I bring that helper back so all FSes but f2fs, btrfs and xfs are > skipped and then still use _try_mkfs so xfs without zoned RT support is > skipped? Except for zonefs, I think you probably have to try mkfsing the zoned block device to decide if the fs really works because the others all had zone support added after the initial release. --D