Re: [PATCH] btrfs/057: Fix test case to work on 64K page size
Sure will work on this. Thanks. Harish On 12/06/2017 01:16 PM, Qu Wenruo wrote: On 2017年12月06日 15:35, Eryu Guan wrote: On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 12:15:45PM +0530, Harish wrote: On platforms with a page size greater than 4Kb, at the moment btrfs doesn't support a node/leaf size smaller than the page size, but it supports a larger one. So use the max supported node size (64Kb) so that the test runs on any platform currently supported by Linux. Signed-off-by: Harish Looks fine to me. Also cc btrfs list for review. Thanks, Eryu --- tests/btrfs/057 | 7 +-- tests/btrfs/057.out | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/btrfs/057 b/tests/btrfs/057 index 8d35579..06b2be9 100755 --- a/tests/btrfs/057 +++ b/tests/btrfs/057 @@ -48,8 +48,11 @@ _require_scratch rm -f $seqres.full -# use small leaf size to get higher btree height. -run_check _scratch_mkfs "-b 1g --nodesize 4096" +# Currently in btrfs the node/leaf size can not be smaller than the page +# size (but it can be greater than the page size). So use the largest +# supported node/leaf size (64Kb) so that the test can run on any platform +# that Linux supports. +run_check _scratch_mkfs "-b 1g --nodesize 65536" Personally speaking, the test doesn't really need super high tree height. So I think it's OK to use a different node size. But I prefer default mkfs.btrfs, which will choose valid nodesize. So for 4K system, it will use default 16K other than always using the 64K nodesize. And further more, the test case is quite old, from the old days when we did even have btrfs check support for qgroup. With new btrfs check support, we don't really need to do anything to check qgroup numbers in test cases, just let fstests post test routines to handle it. If qgroup is corrupted, fstests will report something inconsistent filesystem at post test fsck. Just like what we do in btrfs/126. (so no need to use any magic number in 057.out) So would you please also update the test case to get benefit from the newer btrfs-progs? Thanks, Qu # inode cache is saved in the FS tree itself for every # individual FS tree,that affects the sizes reported by qgroup show diff --git a/tests/btrfs/057.out b/tests/btrfs/057.out index 60cb92d..f2d9e9c 100644 --- a/tests/btrfs/057.out +++ b/tests/btrfs/057.out @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@ QA output created by 057 -4096 4096 -4096 4096 +65536 65536 +65536 65536 -- 2.7.4 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH] btrfs/057: Fix test case to work on 64K page size
On 2017年12月06日 15:35, Eryu Guan wrote: > On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 12:15:45PM +0530, Harish wrote: >> On platforms with a page size greater than 4Kb, at the moment btrfs >> doesn't support a node/leaf size smaller than the page size, but it >> supports a larger one. So use the max supported node size (64Kb) so >> that the test runs on any platform currently supported by Linux. >> >> Signed-off-by: Harish > > Looks fine to me. Also cc btrfs list for review. > > Thanks, > Eryu > >> --- >> tests/btrfs/057 | 7 +-- >> tests/btrfs/057.out | 4 ++-- >> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/057 b/tests/btrfs/057 >> index 8d35579..06b2be9 100755 >> --- a/tests/btrfs/057 >> +++ b/tests/btrfs/057 >> @@ -48,8 +48,11 @@ _require_scratch >> >> rm -f $seqres.full >> >> -# use small leaf size to get higher btree height. >> -run_check _scratch_mkfs "-b 1g --nodesize 4096" >> +# Currently in btrfs the node/leaf size can not be smaller than the page >> +# size (but it can be greater than the page size). So use the largest >> +# supported node/leaf size (64Kb) so that the test can run on any platform >> +# that Linux supports. >> +run_check _scratch_mkfs "-b 1g --nodesize 65536" Personally speaking, the test doesn't really need super high tree height. So I think it's OK to use a different node size. But I prefer default mkfs.btrfs, which will choose valid nodesize. So for 4K system, it will use default 16K other than always using the 64K nodesize. And further more, the test case is quite old, from the old days when we did even have btrfs check support for qgroup. With new btrfs check support, we don't really need to do anything to check qgroup numbers in test cases, just let fstests post test routines to handle it. If qgroup is corrupted, fstests will report something inconsistent filesystem at post test fsck. Just like what we do in btrfs/126. (so no need to use any magic number in 057.out) So would you please also update the test case to get benefit from the newer btrfs-progs? Thanks, Qu >> >> # inode cache is saved in the FS tree itself for every >> # individual FS tree,that affects the sizes reported by qgroup show >> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/057.out b/tests/btrfs/057.out >> index 60cb92d..f2d9e9c 100644 >> --- a/tests/btrfs/057.out >> +++ b/tests/btrfs/057.out >> @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@ >> QA output created by 057 >> -4096 4096 >> -4096 4096 >> +65536 65536 >> +65536 65536 >> -- >> 2.7.4 >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in >> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [PATCH] btrfs/057: Fix test case to work on 64K page size
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 12:15:45PM +0530, Harish wrote: > On platforms with a page size greater than 4Kb, at the moment btrfs > doesn't support a node/leaf size smaller than the page size, but it > supports a larger one. So use the max supported node size (64Kb) so > that the test runs on any platform currently supported by Linux. > > Signed-off-by: Harish Looks fine to me. Also cc btrfs list for review. Thanks, Eryu > --- > tests/btrfs/057 | 7 +-- > tests/btrfs/057.out | 4 ++-- > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tests/btrfs/057 b/tests/btrfs/057 > index 8d35579..06b2be9 100755 > --- a/tests/btrfs/057 > +++ b/tests/btrfs/057 > @@ -48,8 +48,11 @@ _require_scratch > > rm -f $seqres.full > > -# use small leaf size to get higher btree height. > -run_check _scratch_mkfs "-b 1g --nodesize 4096" > +# Currently in btrfs the node/leaf size can not be smaller than the page > +# size (but it can be greater than the page size). So use the largest > +# supported node/leaf size (64Kb) so that the test can run on any platform > +# that Linux supports. > +run_check _scratch_mkfs "-b 1g --nodesize 65536" > > # inode cache is saved in the FS tree itself for every > # individual FS tree,that affects the sizes reported by qgroup show > diff --git a/tests/btrfs/057.out b/tests/btrfs/057.out > index 60cb92d..f2d9e9c 100644 > --- a/tests/btrfs/057.out > +++ b/tests/btrfs/057.out > @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@ > QA output created by 057 > -4096 4096 > -4096 4096 > +65536 65536 > +65536 65536 > -- > 2.7.4 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
