Re: [PATCH 6.1 0/6] backport xfs fix patches reported by xfs/179/270/557/606

Greg KH
2024-04-05T09:27:36Z

On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 11:15:25AM +0200, Mahmoud Adam wrote:
> Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 9:18 PM Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> wrote:
> >> To the group: Who's the appropriate person to handle these?
> >>
> >> Mahmoud: If the answer to the above is "???" or silence, would you be
> >> willing to take on stable testing and maintenance?
>
> Probably there is an answer now :). But Yes, I'm okay with doing that,
> Xfstests is already part for our nightly 6.1 testing.
>
> >
> > Mahmoud,
> >
> > I assume that you are running xfstests on LTS kernels regularly?
> > In that case, you should have an established baseline for failing/passing
> > tests on 6.1.y.
> > Did you run these backports against all tests to verify no regressions?
> > If you did - then please include this information (also which xfs configurations
> > were tested) in the posting of backport candidates to xfs list.
>
> Yes, I did run the full xfstests to confirm no regression. we do
> regularly run the latest stable xfstests version with loopback
> setup. and we run 'xfs/quick' group over x86_64 & arm64 to catch any
> regression. I'll make sure to post to xfs list first next time :)
>
> our setup looks similar to this:
>
> sudo fallocate -l 5G $MOUNT_POINT/block-xfs.img
> sudo mkfs.xfs -f -m reflink=1 $MOUNT_POINT/block-xfs.img
> sudo losetup -f $MOUNT_POINT/block-xfs.img
> sudo mkdir -p $MOUNT_POINT/test
> sudo mount /dev/loop0 $MOUNT_POINT/test
>
> sudo fallocate -l 5G $MOUNT_POINT/block-xfs-scratch.img
> sudo losetup -f $MOUNT_POINT/block-xfs-scratch.img
>
> local.config:
> export DISABLE_UDF_TEST=1
> export TEST_DEV=/dev/loop0
> export TEST_DIR=$MOUNT_POINT/test
> export SCRATCH_MNT=$MOUNT_POINT/scratch
> export SCRATCH_DEV=/dev/loop1

So does this mean we should take these for stable inclusion, or are they
going to need some other tests/acks for us to be able to do this?

thanks,

greg k-h