Re: [PATCH 0/2] fstest changes for LBS

[Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@gmail.com>]

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

> On 23/01/2024 01:25, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 12:17:49PM +0100, Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) wrote:
>>> From: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>
>>>
>>> Some tests need to be adapted to for LBS[1] based on the filesystem
>>> blocksize. These are generic changes where it uses the filesystem
>>> blocksize instead of assuming it.
>>>
>>> There are some more generic test cases that are failing due to logdev
>>> size requirement that changes with filesystem blocksize. I will address
>>> them in a separate series.
>>>
>>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230915183848.1018717-1-kernel@pankajraghav.com/
>>>
>>> Pankaj Raghav (2):
>>>   xfs/558: scale blk IO size based on the filesystem blksz
>>>   xfs/161: adapt the test case for LBS filesystem
>> 
>> Do either of these fail and require fixing for a 64k page size
>> system running 64kB block size?
>> 
>> i.e. are these actual 64kB block size issues, or just issues with
>> the LBS patchset?
>> 
>
> I had the same question in mind. Unfortunately, I don't have access to any 64k Page size
> machine at the moment. I will ask around if I can get access to it.
>
> @Zorro I saw you posted a test report for 64k blocksize. Is it possible for you to
> see if these test cases(xfs/161, xfs/558) work in your setup with 64k block size?
>
> 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.
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.

-ritesh