From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750758AbWCXVjK (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Mar 2006 16:39:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750798AbWCXVjK (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Mar 2006 16:39:10 -0500 Received: from THUNK.ORG ([69.25.196.29]:28133 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750758AbWCXVjJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Mar 2006 16:39:09 -0500 Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 16:39:05 -0500 From: "Theodore Ts'o" To: Valerie Henson , Andrew Morton , pbadari@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, arjan@linux.intel.com, zach.brown@oracle.com Subject: Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC] [PATCH] Reducing average ext2 fsck time through fs-wide dirty bit] Message-ID: <20060324213905.GG18020@thunk.org> Mail-Followup-To: Theodore Ts'o , Valerie Henson , Andrew Morton , pbadari@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, arjan@linux.intel.com, zach.brown@oracle.com References: <20060322011034.GP12571@goober> <1143054558.6086.61.camel@dyn9047017100.beaverton.ibm.com> <20060322224844.GU12571@goober> <20060322175503.3b678ab5.akpm@osdl.org> <20060324143239.GB14508@goober> <20060324192802.GK14852@schatzie.adilger.int> <20060324200131.GE18020@thunk.org> <20060324210033.GQ14852@schatzie.adilger.int> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060324210033.GQ14852@schatzie.adilger.int> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060126 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@thunk.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on thunker.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 02:00:33PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > This would be a prime candidate for trying to add the same sort of > > userspace test framework which Rusty and company did for netfilter, so > > we can try to test for race conditions, corner cases, etc. > > Are you saying to make a filesystem test harness in userspace, or to > add hooks into the kernel to trigger specific cases in the running > kernel? The former: a filesystem test harness in userspace, possibly with some kernel code changes to make it easier to integrate it with the userspace test harness. It's very similar to what the Netfilter folks did, and it has the advantage that we can do testing much more quickly, especially in cases where we want to simulate crashes at certain specific test points to make sure the journal recovery happens correctly. - Ted