Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 4 Mar 2020 05:28:12 -0800 | From | Matthew Wilcox <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCHSET] sanitized pathwalk machinery (v3) |
| |
On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 06:55:47AM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 11:23:39PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > Do the xfs-tests cover that sort of thing? > > The emphasis is stress testing the filesystem not the VFS but there is a > > lot of overlap between the two. > > I do run xfstests. But "runs in KVM without visible slowdowns" != "won't > cause them on 48-core bare metal". And this area (especially when it > comes to RCU mode) can be, er, interesting in that respect. > > FWIW, I'm putting together some litmus tests for pathwalk semantics - > one of the things I'd like to discuss at LSF; quite a few codepaths > are simply not touched by anything in xfstests.
Might be more appropriate for LTP than xfstests? will-it-scale might be the right place for performance benchmarks.
| |