On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 03:06:01PM +0100, John Garry wrote: > On 17/07/2025 14:52, Ojaswin Mujoo wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 02:00:18PM +0100, John Garry wrote: > > > On 12/07/2025 15:12, Ojaswin Mujoo wrote: > > > > From: "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > This adds atomic write test using fio based on it's crc check verifier. > > > > fio adds a crc for each data block. If the underlying device supports atomic > > > > write then it is guaranteed that we will never have a mix data from two > > > > threads writing on the same physical block. > > > > > > I think that you should mention that 2-phase approach. > > > > Sure I can add a comment and update the commit message with this. > > > > > > > > Is there something which ensures that we have fio which supports RWF_ATOMIC? > > > fio for some time supported the "atomic" cmdline param, but did not do > > > anything until recently > > > > We do have _require_fio which ensures the options passed are supported > > by the current fio. If you are saying some versions of fio have --atomic > > valid but dont do an RWF_ATOMIC then I'm not really sure if that can be > > caught though. > > Can you check the fio version? We don't have a helper but yes I think that should be possible > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Co-developed-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > tests/generic/1226 | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > tests/generic/1226.out | 2 + > > > > > > Was this tested with xfs? > > > > Yes, I've tested with XFS with software fallback as well. Also, tested > > xfs while keeping io size as 16kb so we stress the hw paths too. > > so is that requirement implemented with the _require_scratch_write_atomic > check? No, its just something i hardcoded for that particular run. This patch doesn't enforce hardware only atomic writes Regards, ojaswin > > > Both > > seem to be passing as expected. > > > > >
