Re: [PATCH v6 0/7] vfs: Non-blockling buffered fs read (page cache only)

Dave Chinner [off-list ref] writes:

On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 12:03:14PM -0500, Jeff Moyer wrote:

quoted

Milosz Tanski [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

Can you write a test (or set of) for fstests that exercises this new
functionality? I'm not worried about performance, just
correctness....

Sure thing. Can you point me at the fstests repo? A quick google
search reveals lots of projects named fstests, most of them abandoned.

I think he's referring to xfstests.  Still, I think that's the wrong
place for functional testing.  ltp would be better, imo.

I don't follow. Can you explain why is xfstests be the wrong place
to exercise this functionality and what makes ltp a better choice?

Right, I should have made a case for that.  ltp already has test cases
for system calls such as readv/writev (though they are woefully
inadequate).  It simply looked like a better fit to me.  For some reason
I view xfstests as a regression test suite, but I know that isn't
strictly true.

If you feel xfstests is a better place, and Ted makes a good case for
that choice, then that's fine with me.  I'm not, as Ted worried,
insisting on putting test cases into ltp.  :)  I was expressing my
opinion, and am happy for the dialog.

Cheers,
Jeff

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-aio' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux AIO,
see: http://www.kvack.org/aio/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org">aart@kvack.org</a>