linux-block.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
To: Chaitanya Kulkarni <Chaitanya.Kulkarni@wdc.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com>
Cc: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>, Stephen Bates <sbates@raithlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH blktests v2 03/11] common/xfs: Create common helper to verify block device with xfs
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 09:53:44 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2af98b64-1f3b-6570-d5be-a2e2bc4950f9@deltatee.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR04MB49652338A4FE3805F9394A88860A0@BYAPR04MB4965.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>



On 2020-10-06 6:20 p.m., Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
> On 10/6/20 16:59, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>>> The mount dir should be a parameter and not the hardcode value
>>> to make it reusable.
>> I also disagree here. It is already reusable and is used in a number of
>> places; none of those places require changing the mount directory. If
>> and when a use comes up that requires a different directory (not sure
>> what that would be), a parameter can be added. It is typically standard
>> practice in the Linux community to not add features that have no users
>> as it's confusing to people reading the code.
>>
>> Logan
>>
> Well if you are making a helper it should be generic if you have a usecase,

"Generic" isn't a binary yes/no quality. Why add the mount option (that nobody is using) 
and not a size option as well that nobody uses? For that matter, fio has a ton of options
we could expose. (think io-method, read/write pattern, etc, etc). The criteria we
decide upon which options get exposed as arguments is what the code that's actually
using it needs -- not what's available or what you imagine future use cases might be.
If there are no users in the code it should not be exposed. If a use case comes along,
an argument can easily be added when the new test is added to the code base.

> mounted on different mount points not just one which is important testcase,
> 
> that will require a prep patch.

So? That's normal.
 
> Why can't we do that right now when we have a clear usecase ?

We don't have a clear use case that's being added to the code though... We 
have an imagined use case that hasn't been written. Add the feature when you
add this use case.

Logan

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-10-07 15:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-09-30 18:54 [PATCH blktests v2 00/11] NVMe Target Passthru Block Tests Logan Gunthorpe
2020-09-30 18:54 ` [PATCH blktests v2 01/11] common/fio: Remove state file in common helper Logan Gunthorpe
2020-09-30 18:54 ` [PATCH blktests v2 02/11] common/xfs: Create common helper to check for XFS support Logan Gunthorpe
2020-10-06 23:44   ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2020-10-06 23:51     ` Logan Gunthorpe
2020-10-07  0:58       ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2020-09-30 18:54 ` [PATCH blktests v2 03/11] common/xfs: Create common helper to verify block device with xfs Logan Gunthorpe
2020-10-06 23:50   ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2020-10-06 23:59     ` Logan Gunthorpe
     [not found]       ` <BYAPR04MB49652338A4FE3805F9394A88860A0@BYAPR04MB4965.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
2020-10-07 15:53         ` Logan Gunthorpe [this message]
2020-09-30 18:54 ` [PATCH blktests v2 04/11] nvme: Search for specific subsysnqn in _find_nvme_loop_dev Logan Gunthorpe
2020-10-06 23:55   ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2020-10-07  0:10     ` Logan Gunthorpe
     [not found]       ` <BYAPR04MB49650C6419A84705D04FFE63860A0@BYAPR04MB4965.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
2020-10-07 15:55         ` Logan Gunthorpe
2020-09-30 18:54 ` [PATCH blktests v2 05/11] nvme: Add common helpers for passthru tests Logan Gunthorpe
2020-10-07  0:02   ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2020-10-07  0:13     ` Logan Gunthorpe
2020-09-30 18:54 ` [PATCH blktests v2 06/11] nvme/033: Simple test to create and connect to a passthru target Logan Gunthorpe
2020-09-30 18:54 ` [PATCH blktests v2 07/11] nvme/034: Add test for passthru data verification Logan Gunthorpe
2020-09-30 18:54 ` [PATCH blktests v2 08/11] nvme/035: Add test to verify passthru controller with a filesystem Logan Gunthorpe
2020-09-30 18:54 ` [PATCH blktests v2 09/11] nvme/036: Add test for testing reset command on nvme-passthru Logan Gunthorpe
2020-09-30 18:54 ` [PATCH blktests v2 10/11] nvme/037: Add test which loops passthru connect and disconnect Logan Gunthorpe
2020-09-30 18:54 ` [PATCH blktests v2 11/11] nvme/038: Test removal of un-enabled subsystem and ports Logan Gunthorpe

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=2af98b64-1f3b-6570-d5be-a2e2bc4950f9@deltatee.com \
    --to=logang@deltatee.com \
    --cc=Chaitanya.Kulkarni@wdc.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=osandov@osandov.com \
    --cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
    --cc=sbates@raithlin.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).