On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 8:02 PM Chao Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10/29/25 17:34, Joanne Chang wrote: > > --- > > tests/f2fs/011 | 5 +++-- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/tests/f2fs/011 b/tests/f2fs/011 > > index c21cb586..75679b36 100755 > > --- a/tests/f2fs/011 > > +++ b/tests/f2fs/011 > > @@ -35,8 +35,9 @@ _scratch_mount -o checkpoint=disable:10% > > pinfile=$SCRATCH_MNT/file > > > > # simulate fragment status in f2fs > > -for ((i=0;i<256;i++)) do > > - $XFS_IO_PROG -f -c "pwrite 0 1m" $SCRATCH_MNT/$i >>$seqres.full > > +dd if=/dev/urandom of=$SCRATCH_MNT/0 bs=1M count=1 2> /dev/null > > IIRC, $XFS_IO_PROG is preferred in xfstests [1] > > [1] > https://lore.kernel.org/fstests/20250326140938.6ll7yeez6iwab...@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com > > So, what do you think of this? > > for ((i=0;i<256;i++)) do > $XFS_IO_PROG -f -c "pwrite -i /dev/urandom 0 1m" $SCRATCH_MNT/$i > >>$seqres.full > done
Thanks for the suggestion, Chao. I will send v2 with this change soon. > > +for ((i=1;i<256;i++)) do > > + cp $SCRATCH_MNT/0 $SCRATCH_MNT/$i > > done > > sync > > > _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
