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
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvme mailing list
Linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-07 15:54 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).