| Message ID | 13ca87a192f4eb8a8f10415ae1ff06682c3b40a0.1710867187.git.josef@toxicpanda.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | fstests: various RAID56 related fixes for btrfs | expand |
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 12:55:58PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: > There are a few tests that don't have the required > > _require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56 > > check in them even tho they are raid5/6 related tests. Add this check > in order to make sure environments that don't have raid5/6 support don't > improperly fail them. > > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> > --- > tests/btrfs/197 | 1 + > tests/btrfs/198 | 1 + > tests/btrfs/297 | 1 + > 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tests/btrfs/197 b/tests/btrfs/197 > index d259fd99..8a034fdc 100755 > --- a/tests/btrfs/197 > +++ b/tests/btrfs/197 > @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ _require_scratch > _require_scratch_dev_pool 5 > # Zoned btrfs only supports SINGLE profile > _require_non_zoned_device ${SCRATCH_DEV} > +_require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56 How about moving the check in the workout() side, and skip the work based on a specified profile? This test runs the workout with raid1, 5, 6, and 10. This check can needlessly skip the test for raid1 and raid10 if the profile setup does not contain raid5 and raid6. Especially, as we already have raid1 and raid10 support on a zoned setup, we'd like to run the tests for them on it. > > workout() > { > diff --git a/tests/btrfs/198 b/tests/btrfs/198 > index 7d23ffce..ecce81cd 100755 > --- a/tests/btrfs/198 > +++ b/tests/btrfs/198 > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ _require_scratch > _require_scratch_dev_pool 4 > # Zoned btrfs only supports SINGLE profile > _require_non_zoned_device ${SCRATCH_DEV} > +_require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56 Same here. > _fixed_by_kernel_commit 96c2e067ed3e3e \ > "btrfs: skip devices without magic signature when mounting" > > diff --git a/tests/btrfs/297 b/tests/btrfs/297 > index a0023861..990b83b1 100755 > --- a/tests/btrfs/297 > +++ b/tests/btrfs/297 > @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ _supported_fs btrfs > _require_odirect > _require_non_zoned_device "${SCRATCH_DEV}" > _require_scratch_dev_pool 3 > +_require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56 This seems fine because it runs only raid5 and raid6. > _fixed_by_kernel_commit 486c737f7fdc \ > "btrfs: raid56: always verify the P/Q contents for scrub" > > -- > 2.43.0 >
On 3/21/24 11:25, Naohiro Aota wrote: > On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 12:55:58PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: >> There are a few tests that don't have the required >> >> _require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56 >> >> check in them even tho they are raid5/6 related tests. Add this check >> in order to make sure environments that don't have raid5/6 support don't >> improperly fail them. >> >> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> >> --- >> tests/btrfs/197 | 1 + >> tests/btrfs/198 | 1 + >> tests/btrfs/297 | 1 + >> 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/197 b/tests/btrfs/197 >> index d259fd99..8a034fdc 100755 >> --- a/tests/btrfs/197 >> +++ b/tests/btrfs/197 >> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ _require_scratch >> _require_scratch_dev_pool 5 >> # Zoned btrfs only supports SINGLE profile >> _require_non_zoned_device ${SCRATCH_DEV} >> +_require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56 > > How about moving the check in the workout() side, and skip the work based > on a specified profile? Yeah, it's better to check for raid56 support in the workout() function rather than at the testcase level. We can silently skip the workload if the kernel doesn't support raid56. > This test runs the workout with raid1, 5, 6, and 10. This check can > needlessly skip the test for raid1 and raid10 if the profile setup does not > contain raid5 and raid6. > Especially, as we already have raid1 and raid10 support on a zoned setup, > we'd like to run the tests for them on it. This can be taken separately, not as part of this patch. Thanks, Anand > >> >> workout() >> { >> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/198 b/tests/btrfs/198 >> index 7d23ffce..ecce81cd 100755 >> --- a/tests/btrfs/198 >> +++ b/tests/btrfs/198 >> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ _require_scratch >> _require_scratch_dev_pool 4 >> # Zoned btrfs only supports SINGLE profile >> _require_non_zoned_device ${SCRATCH_DEV} >> +_require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56 > > Same here. > >> _fixed_by_kernel_commit 96c2e067ed3e3e \ >> "btrfs: skip devices without magic signature when mounting" >> >> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/297 b/tests/btrfs/297 >> index a0023861..990b83b1 100755 >> --- a/tests/btrfs/297 >> +++ b/tests/btrfs/297 >> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ _supported_fs btrfs >> _require_odirect >> _require_non_zoned_device "${SCRATCH_DEV}" >> _require_scratch_dev_pool 3 >> +_require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56 > > This seems fine because it runs only raid5 and raid6. > >> _fixed_by_kernel_commit 486c737f7fdc \ >> "btrfs: raid56: always verify the P/Q contents for scrub" >> >> -- >> 2.43.0
diff --git a/tests/btrfs/197 b/tests/btrfs/197 index d259fd99..8a034fdc 100755 --- a/tests/btrfs/197 +++ b/tests/btrfs/197 @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ _require_scratch _require_scratch_dev_pool 5 # Zoned btrfs only supports SINGLE profile _require_non_zoned_device ${SCRATCH_DEV} +_require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56 workout() { diff --git a/tests/btrfs/198 b/tests/btrfs/198 index 7d23ffce..ecce81cd 100755 --- a/tests/btrfs/198 +++ b/tests/btrfs/198 @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ _require_scratch _require_scratch_dev_pool 4 # Zoned btrfs only supports SINGLE profile _require_non_zoned_device ${SCRATCH_DEV} +_require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56 _fixed_by_kernel_commit 96c2e067ed3e3e \ "btrfs: skip devices without magic signature when mounting" diff --git a/tests/btrfs/297 b/tests/btrfs/297 index a0023861..990b83b1 100755 --- a/tests/btrfs/297 +++ b/tests/btrfs/297 @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ _supported_fs btrfs _require_odirect _require_non_zoned_device "${SCRATCH_DEV}" _require_scratch_dev_pool 3 +_require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56 _fixed_by_kernel_commit 486c737f7fdc \ "btrfs: raid56: always verify the P/Q contents for scrub"
There are a few tests that don't have the required _require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56 check in them even tho they are raid5/6 related tests. Add this check in order to make sure environments that don't have raid5/6 support don't improperly fail them. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> --- tests/btrfs/197 | 1 + tests/btrfs/198 | 1 + tests/btrfs/297 | 1 + 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+)