On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 08:49:28PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:

On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 05:10:22PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

quoted

The user-space FUSE thing does indeed work reasonably well.

It performs horribly badly if you care about things like that, though.

In fact, your own numbers kind of show that:

  ntfs/default: 670 tests, 55 failures, 211 skipped, 34783 seconds
  ntfs3/default: 664 tests, 67 failures, 206 skipped, 8106 seconds

and that's kind of the point of ntfs3.

Sure, although if you run fstress in parallel ntfs3 will lock up, the
system hard, and it has at least one lockdep deadlock complaints.
It's not up to me, but personally, I'd feel better if *someone* at
Paragon Software responded to Darrrick and my queries about their
quality assurance, and/or made commitments that they would at least
*try* to fix the problems that about 5 minutes of testing using
fstests turned up trivially.

<cough> Yes, my aim was to gauge their interest in actively QAing the
driver's current problems so that it doesn't become one of the shabby
Linux filesystem drivers, like <cough>ntfs.

Note I didn't even ask for a particular percentage of passing tests,
because I already know that non-Unix filesystems fail the tests that
look for the more Unix-specific behaviors.

I really only wanted them to tell /us/ what the baseline is.  IMHO the
silence from them is a lot more telling.  Both generic/013 and
generic/475 are basic "try to create files and read and write data to
them" exercisers; failing those is a red flag.

--D

I can even give them patches and configsto make it trivially easy for
them to run fstests using KVM or GCE....

				- Ted