From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755479AbbAHAwy (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2015 19:52:54 -0500 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:49318 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751977AbbAHAwx (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2015 19:52:53 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,862,1389772800"; d="scan'208";a="437789752" Message-ID: <1420678371.6201.78.camel@intel.com> Subject: Re: [LKP] [null_blk] f2298c0403b: From: Huang Ying To: Jens Axboe Cc: LKML , LKP ML Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 08:52:51 +0800 In-Reply-To: <54AD4F98.6070702@kernel.dk> References: <1420598028.6201.70.camel@intel.com> <54AD4F98.6070702@kernel.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2015-01-07 at 08:24 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 01/06/2015 07:33 PM, Huang Ying wrote: > > FYI, we noticed the below changes on > > > > commit f2298c0403b0dfcaef637eba0c02c4a06d7a25ab ("null_blk: multi queue aware block test driver") > > > > > > testbox/testcase/testparams: vm-kbuild-yocto-i386/boot/1 > > > > 320ae51feed5c2f1 f2298c0403b0dfcaef637eba0c > > ---------------- -------------------------- > > fail:runs %reproduction fail:runs > > | | | > > :10 100% 10:10 kmsg.VFS:could_not_find_a_valid_V7_on_nullb1 > > :10 100% 10:10 kmsg.VFS:could_not_find_a_valid_V7_on_nullb0 > > 1:10 -10% :10 kmsg.vm86_32:could_not_access_userspace_vm86_info > > > > vm-kbuild-yocto-i386: qemu-system-i386 -enable-kvm > > Memory: 320M > > > > [ 1.971241] mtip32xx Version 1.2.6os3 > > [ 1.971311] blk-mq: CPU -> queue map > > [ 1.971312] CPU 0 -> Queue 0 > > [ 1.971314] CPU 1 -> Queue 0 > > [ 1.971628] nullb0: unknown partition table > > [ 1.971748] blk-mq: CPU -> queue map > > [ 1.971749] CPU 0 -> Queue 0 > > [ 1.971751] CPU 1 -> Queue 0 > > [ 1.972023] nullb1: unknown partition table > > [ 1.972096] null: module loaded > > [ 1.972131] ibmasm: IBM ASM Service Processor Driver version 1.0 loaded > > > > I think this is at least confusing for the end user. > > Sorry, not sure I follow at all. If you're expecting the null block > driver to actually store data, then yes, you are going to have a bad > time. It's a test tool for storage stack development. I understand that null block is just for testing. I just think the message like: [ 1.971628] nullb0: unknown partition table may confuse the end user. They may think there are something wrong. But it is not. Is there any way to suppress this? Best Regards, Huang, Ying