public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
To: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	"Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)" <kernel@pankajraghav.com>
Cc: zlang@redhat.com, fstests@vger.kernel.org, djwong@kernel.org,
	mcgrof@kernel.org, gost.dev@samsung.com,
	linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] fstest changes for LBS
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 01:12:07 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87frynkfao.fsf@doe.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <803025df-5381-494d-9325-dd0a45312b8b@samsung.com>

Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com> writes:

>>> CCing Ritesh as I saw him post a patch to fix a testcase for 64k block size.
>> 
>> Hi Pankaj,
>> 
>> So I tested this on Linux 6.6 on Power8 qemu (which I had it handy).
>> xfs/558 passed with both 64k blocksize & with 4k blocksize on a 64k
>> pagesize system.

Ok, so it looks like the testcase xfs/558 is failing on linux-next with
64k blocksize but passing with 4k blocksize.
It thought it was passing on my previous linux 6.6 release, but I guess
those too were just some lucky runs. Here is the report -

linux-next: xfs/558 aggregate results across 11 runs: pass=2 (18.2%), fail=9 (81.8%)
v6.6: xfs/558 aggregate results across 11 runs: pass=5 (45.5%), fail=6 (54.5%)

So I guess, I will spend sometime analyzing why the failure.

Failure log
================
xfs/558 36s ... - output mismatch (see /root/xfstests-dev/results//xfs_64k_iomap/xfs/558.out.bad)
    --- tests/xfs/558.out       2023-06-29 12:06:13.824276289 +0000
    +++ /root/xfstests-dev/results//xfs_64k_iomap/xfs/558.out.bad       2024-01-23 18:54:56.613116520 +0000
    @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@
     QA output created by 558
    +Expected to hear about writeback iomap invalidations?
     Silence is golden
    ...
    (Run 'diff -u /root/xfstests-dev/tests/xfs/558.out /root/xfstests-dev/results//xfs_64k_iomap/xfs/558.out.bad'  to see the entire diff)

HINT: You _MAY_ be missing kernel fix:
      5c665e5b5af6 xfs: remove xfs_map_cow

-ritesh

>
> Thanks for testing it out. I will investigate this further, and see why
> I have this failure in LBS for 64k and not for 32k and 16k block sizes.
>
> As this test also expects some invalidation during the page cache writeback,
> this might an issue just with LBS and not for 64k page size machines.
>
> Probably I will also spend some time to set up a Power8 qemu to test these failures.
>
>> However, since on this system the quota was v4.05, it does not support
>> bigtime feature hence could not run xfs/161. 
>> 
>> xfs/161       [not run] quota: bigtime support not detected
>> xfs/558 7s ...  21s
>> 
>> I will collect this info on a different system with latest kernel and
>> will update for xfs/161 too.
>> 
>
> Sounds good! Thanks!
>
>> -ritesh

  reply	other threads:[~2024-01-23 19:42 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
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 [this message]
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=87frynkfao.fsf@doe.com \
    --to=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=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