On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:50 PM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 3:34 PM André Almeida <andrealmeid@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi Amir, > > > > On 8/14/25 21:06, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 7:30 PM André Almeida <andrealmeid@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> Em 14/08/2025 14:22, André Almeida escreveu: > > >>> Hi all, > > >>> > > >>> We would like to support the usage of casefold layers with overlayfs to > > >>> be used with container tools. This use case requires a simple setup, > > >>> where every layer will have the same encoding setting (i.e. Unicode > > >>> version and flags), using one upper and one lower layer. > > >>> > > >> Amir, > > >> > > >> I tried to run your xfstest for casefolded ovl[1] but I can see that it > > >> still requires some work. I tried to fix some of the TODO's but I didn't > > >> managed to mkfs the base fs with casefold enabled... > > > When you write mkfs the base fs, I suspect that you are running > > > check -overlay or something. > > > > > > This is not how this test should be run. > > > It should run as a normal test on ext4 or any other fs that supports casefold. > > > > > > When you run check -g casefold, the generic test generic/556 will > > > be run if the test fs supports casefold (e.g. ext4). > > > > > > The new added test belongs to the same group and should run > > > if you run check -g casefold if the test fs supports casefold (e.g. ext4). > > > > > I see, I used `check -overlay` indeed, thanks! > > > > Yeh that's a bit confusing I'll admit. > It's an overlayfs test that "does not run on overlayfs" > but requires extra overlayfs: > > _exclude_fs overlay > _require_extra_fs overlay > > Because it does the overlayfs mount itself. > That's the easiest way to test features (e.g. casefold) in basefs > I tried to run the new test, which is able to mount an overlayfs with layers with disabled casefolding with kernel 6.17-rc1. It does not even succeed in passing this simple test with your patches, so something is clearly off. > You should also run check -overlay -g overlay/quick, > but that's only to verify your patches did not regress any > non-casefolded test. > > My tests also indicate that there are several regressions, so your patches must have changed code paths that should not have been changed. Thanks, Amir.
