| Message ID | 20220827002815.19116-2-pvorel@suse.cz (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Track minimal size per filesystem | expand |
Hi!
Reviewed-by: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>
Minor nit, but the subject line has nsfs when I think it means ntfs. -- Tim > -----Original Message----- > From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> > > Signed-off-by: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> > --- > include/tst_fs.h | 5 ++++- > lib/tst_fs_type.c | 6 ++++++ > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/include/tst_fs.h b/include/tst_fs.h > index 8159b99eb..a6f934b0f 100644 > --- a/include/tst_fs.h > +++ b/include/tst_fs.h > @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ > #ifndef TST_FS_H__ > #define TST_FS_H__ > > -/* man 2 statfs or kernel-source/include/linux/magic.h */ > +/* man 2 statfs or kernel-source/include/uapi/linux/magic.h */ > #define TST_BTRFS_MAGIC 0x9123683E > #define TST_NFS_MAGIC 0x6969 > #define TST_RAMFS_MAGIC 0x858458f6 > @@ -32,6 +32,9 @@ > #define TST_FUSE_MAGIC 0x65735546 > #define TST_VFAT_MAGIC 0x4d44 /* AKA MSDOS */ > #define TST_EXFAT_MAGIC 0x2011BAB0UL > +#define TST_SQUASHFS_MAGIC 0x73717368 > +/* kernel-source/fs/ntfs/ntfs.h */ > +#define TST_NTFS_MAGIC 0x5346544e > > enum { > TST_BYTES = 1, > diff --git a/lib/tst_fs_type.c b/lib/tst_fs_type.c > index 9de80224b..de4facef5 100644 > --- a/lib/tst_fs_type.c > +++ b/lib/tst_fs_type.c > @@ -88,6 +88,12 @@ const char *tst_fs_type_name(long f_type) > return "fuse"; > case TST_EXFAT_MAGIC: > return "exfat"; > + case TST_NTFS_MAGIC: > + return "ntfs"; > + case TST_SQUASHFS_MAGIC: > + return "squashfs"; > + case TST_VFAT_MAGIC: > + return "vfat"; > default: > return "unknown"; > } > -- > 2.37.2
Hi Tim, > Minor nit, but the subject line has nsfs when I think it means ntfs. > -- Tim Thanks, will be fixed in v2. How about XFS using 300 MB vs 16 MB but using different code paths? How big deal it'd be if we require 300 MB in case testing on kernel with XFS enabled and xfsprogs installed? https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/YwyYUzvlxfIGpTwo@yuki/ https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/YwyljsgYIK3AvUr+@pevik/ Kind regards, Petr
> -----Original Message----- > From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> > Hi Tim, > > > Minor nit, but the subject line has nsfs when I think it means ntfs. > > -- Tim > Thanks, will be fixed in v2. > > How about XFS using 300 MB vs 16 MB but using different code paths? > How big deal it'd be if we require 300 MB in case testing on kernel with XFS > enabled and xfsprogs installed? > > https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/YwyYUzvlxfIGpTwo@yuki/ > https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/YwyljsgYIK3AvUr+@pevik/ I'm not personally aware of any uses of XFS in embedded projects, let alone ones with a filesystem size of less than 300 MB. So I think it would be OK. Such a test might hit some lightly used codepaths, so it might have more likelihood to reveal a bug in XFS. But if literally no one is using XFS in this configuration, I'm not sure how valuable the testing would be. That said, my knowledge of the embedded ecosystem is not comprehensive. I just posted a question about this on the celinux-dev and Linux-embedded mailing lists. I let you know if I hear of anyone using an XFS filesystem less than 300 MB in size in their embedded Linux project or device. -- Tim
> > -----Original Message----- > > From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> > > Hi Tim, > > > Minor nit, but the subject line has nsfs when I think it means ntfs. > > > -- Tim > > Thanks, will be fixed in v2. > > How about XFS using 300 MB vs 16 MB but using different code paths? > > How big deal it'd be if we require 300 MB in case testing on kernel with XFS > > enabled and xfsprogs installed? > > https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/YwyYUzvlxfIGpTwo@yuki/ > > https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/YwyljsgYIK3AvUr+@pevik/ > I'm not personally aware of any uses of XFS in embedded projects, let alone > ones with a filesystem size of less than 300 MB. So I think it would be OK. > Such a test might hit some lightly used codepaths, so it might have more likelihood > to reveal a bug in XFS. But if literally no one is using XFS in this configuration, > I'm not sure how valuable the testing would be. > That said, my knowledge of the embedded ecosystem is not comprehensive. > I just posted a question about this on the celinux-dev and Linux-embedded > mailing lists. I let you know if I hear of anyone using an XFS filesystem less > than 300 MB in size in their embedded Linux project or device. > -- Tim Thanks a lot, Tim! Kind regards, Petr
diff --git a/include/tst_fs.h b/include/tst_fs.h index 8159b99eb..a6f934b0f 100644 --- a/include/tst_fs.h +++ b/include/tst_fs.h @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ #ifndef TST_FS_H__ #define TST_FS_H__ -/* man 2 statfs or kernel-source/include/linux/magic.h */ +/* man 2 statfs or kernel-source/include/uapi/linux/magic.h */ #define TST_BTRFS_MAGIC 0x9123683E #define TST_NFS_MAGIC 0x6969 #define TST_RAMFS_MAGIC 0x858458f6 @@ -32,6 +32,9 @@ #define TST_FUSE_MAGIC 0x65735546 #define TST_VFAT_MAGIC 0x4d44 /* AKA MSDOS */ #define TST_EXFAT_MAGIC 0x2011BAB0UL +#define TST_SQUASHFS_MAGIC 0x73717368 +/* kernel-source/fs/ntfs/ntfs.h */ +#define TST_NTFS_MAGIC 0x5346544e enum { TST_BYTES = 1, diff --git a/lib/tst_fs_type.c b/lib/tst_fs_type.c index 9de80224b..de4facef5 100644 --- a/lib/tst_fs_type.c +++ b/lib/tst_fs_type.c @@ -88,6 +88,12 @@ const char *tst_fs_type_name(long f_type) return "fuse"; case TST_EXFAT_MAGIC: return "exfat"; + case TST_NTFS_MAGIC: + return "ntfs"; + case TST_SQUASHFS_MAGIC: + return "squashfs"; + case TST_VFAT_MAGIC: + return "vfat"; default: return "unknown"; }
Signed-off-by: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> --- include/tst_fs.h | 5 ++++- lib/tst_fs_type.c | 6 ++++++ 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)