On 2/14/14, 7:39 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 05:48:59PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> On 2/14/14, 4:24 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: >>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 10:41:16AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>>> On 2/14/14, 10:39 AM, David Sterba wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:42:55AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>>>>>> +cat /proc/mounts | grep "$SCRATCH_MNT" | grep relatime >> $seqres.full >>>>>>> +[ $? -ne 0 ] && echo "The relatime mount option should be the default." >>>>>> >>>>>> Ok, I guess "relatime" in /proc/mounts is from core vfs code and >>>>>> should be there for the foreseeable future, so seems ok. >>>>>> >>>>>> But - relatime was added in v2.6.20, and made default in 2.6.30. So >>>>>> testing older kernels may not go as expected; it'd probably be best to >>>>>> catch situations where relatime isn't available (< 2.6.20) or not >>>>>> default (< 2.6.30), by explicitly mounting with relatime, and skipping >>>>>> relatime/strictatime tests if that fails? >>>>> >>>>> Is there some consensus what's the lowest kernel version to be supported >>>>> by xfstests? 2.6.32 is the lowest base for kernels in use today, so >>>>> worrying about anything older does not seem necessary. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I don't know that it's been discussed - selfishly, I know our QE uses >>>> xfstests on RHEL5, which is 2.6.18-based. >>> >>> Sure, but they can just add the test to a "rhel5-expunged" file and >>> they don't have to care about tests that won't work on RHEL 5 or >>> other older kernels. Or to send patches to add "_requires_relatime" >>> so that it automatically does the right thing for older kernels. >> >> sure but some of this test is still valid on a kernel w/o relatime. >> And since it's the default, "relatime" might disappear from /proc/mounts >> some day anyway, so explicitly mounting with the option & failing >> if that fails might be good future-proofind in any case. >> >> *shrug* >> >> It was just a request, not a demand. :) Koen, you can do with >> it whatever you like. Reviews aren't ultimatums. :) >> >> If xfstests upstream is only targeted at the current kernel, that's >> fine, but maye we should make that a little more explicit. > > That's not what I meant. ;) > > Really, all I'm saying is that we can't expect people who are > writing tests that work on current kernels to know what is necessary > to make tests work on 7 year old distros that don't support a > feature that has been in mainline for 5 years. Hence that shouldn't > be a barrier to having a test committed as we have mechanisms for > distro QE to handle these sorts of issues...
Sure, that's perfectly fair. I wasn't really thinking of RHEL5 when I made my first comment, just general portability across kernels. dsterba suggested that 2.6.32 is the oldest kernel used, and I pointed out that we do still use 2.6.18. :) Anyway, for general portability across releases, perhaps rather than: +cat /proc/mounts | grep "$SCRATCH_MNT" | grep relatime >> $seqres.full +[ $? -ne 0 ] && echo "The relatime mount option should be the default." which would fail the test, it should just [notrun] if relatime isn't there, for any reason, on any kernel, if relatime is not default as expected for the test framework. i.e. +[ $? -ne 0 ] && _notrun "The relatime mount option is not the default." -Eric -- 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
