On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 11:22 AM, Ross Zwisler <ross.zwis...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 03:54:04PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> Looks good: >> >> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <h...@lst.de> >> >> Can you wire up your test cases for blktests? > > Is blktests really the right place for this test? This failure is highly > dependent on the configuration of the filesystem that is holding the file that > we are using for the loopback device. It doesn't seem like blktests has > support for mount options (dax), etc? > > Because of the interaction with the underlying filesystem this seems like a > better fit with xfstests to me, but I don't know if we need to add tests there > because we already have pretty good coverage of loopback device failures. > That's how we found this - this bug causes all these tests to fail: > xfs/074 xfs/078 xfs/216 xfs/217 xfs/250
The problem is that those tests don't configure the device in 4K sector mode, so we're still missing a regression test. That seems to be where blktests can come into play. _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
