Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 2 Jun 2020 11:14:44 -0700 (PDT) | From | "Darrick J. Wong" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] xfs/XXX: Add xfs/XXX |
| |
On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 04:51:48PM +0800, Xiao Yang wrote: > On 2020/4/14 0:30, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > This might be a good time to introduce a few new helpers: > > > > _require_scratch_dax ("Does $SCRATCH_DEV support DAX?") > > _require_scratch_dax_mountopt ("Does the fs support the DAX mount options?") > > _require_scratch_daX_iflag ("Does the fs support FS_XFLAG_DAX?") > Hi Darrick, > > Now, I am trying to introduce these new helpers and have some questions: > 1) There are five testcases related to old dax implementation, should we > only convert them to new dax implementation or make them compatible with old > and new dax implementation?
What is the 'old' DAX implementation? ext2 XIP?
> 2) I think _require_xfs_io_command "chattr" "x" is enough to check if fs > supports FS_XFLAG_DAX. Is it necessary to add _require_scratch_dax_iflag()? > like this: > _require_scratch_dax_iflag() > { > _require_xfs_io_command "chattr" "x" > }
I suggested that list based on the major control knobs that will be visible to userspace programs. Even if this is just a one-line helper, its name is useful for recognizing which of those knobs we're looking for.
Yes, you could probably save a trivial amount of time by skipping one iteration of bash function calling, but now everyone has to remember that the xfs_io chattr "x" flag means the dax inode flag, and not confuse it for chmod +x or something else.
--D
> Best Regards, > Xiao Yang > >
| |