From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 156FFC433DF for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 09:31:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0A0A2070A for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 09:31:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726769AbgGUJbS (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 05:31:18 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:58148 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725984AbgGUJbS (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 05:31:18 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 950C4B875; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 09:31:23 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 11:31:15 +0200 From: Petr Vorel To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Trond Myklebust , "ltp@lists.linux.it" , "bfields@fieldses.org" , "chuck.lever@oracle.com" , "linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" , "alexey.kodanev@oracle.com" , "yangx.jy@cn.fujitsu.com" , Cyril Hrubis , Yong Sun Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] Remove nfsv4 Message-ID: <20200721093115.GB1164@dell5510> Reply-To: Petr Vorel References: <20200720091449.19813-1-pvorel@suse.cz> <20200720151742.GA16973@infradead.org> <20200720181658.GA32123@dell5510> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200720181658.GA32123@dell5510> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Hi Christoph, > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 01:32:09PM +0000, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > > On Mon, 2020-07-20 at 11:14 +0200, Petr Vorel wrote: > > > > Reasons to drop: > > > > * outdated tests (from 2005) > > > > * not used (NFS kernel maintainers use pynfs [1]) > > > > * written in Python (we support C and shell, see [2]) > > > > [1] http://git.linux-nfs.org/?p=bfields/pynfs.git;a=summary > > > > [2] https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/issues/547 > > > Unlike pynfs, these tests run on a real NFS client, and were designed > > > to test client implementations, as well as the servers. > > > So if they get dropped from ltp, then we will have to figure out some > > > other way of continuing to maintain them. > > NFS tests using the kernel sound like a prime candidate for xfstests. > In the past Yong Sun moved some ext4 related tests from LTP to xfstests. > LTP has various NFS related tests. IMHO more important than where these tests > should be is if anybody has a deeper look into them an cleanup them / rewrite > them from scratch. Although xfstests sounds like a natural choice, atm there are quite a lot NFS tests in LTP. xfstests contain only single NFS test. IMHO it's a choice of anybody who rewrites these tests whether he tries to put them to LTP or into xfstests. If it were me I'd probably keep them in LTP, because I prefer LTP framework capabilities. Kind regards, Petr From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Petr Vorel Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 11:31:15 +0200 Subject: [LTP] [RFC PATCH 1/1] Remove nfsv4 In-Reply-To: <20200720181658.GA32123@dell5510> References: <20200720091449.19813-1-pvorel@suse.cz> <20200720151742.GA16973@infradead.org> <20200720181658.GA32123@dell5510> Message-ID: <20200721093115.GB1164@dell5510> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it Hi Christoph, > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 01:32:09PM +0000, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > > On Mon, 2020-07-20 at 11:14 +0200, Petr Vorel wrote: > > > > Reasons to drop: > > > > * outdated tests (from 2005) > > > > * not used (NFS kernel maintainers use pynfs [1]) > > > > * written in Python (we support C and shell, see [2]) > > > > [1] http://git.linux-nfs.org/?p=bfields/pynfs.git;a=summary > > > > [2] https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/issues/547 > > > Unlike pynfs, these tests run on a real NFS client, and were designed > > > to test client implementations, as well as the servers. > > > So if they get dropped from ltp, then we will have to figure out some > > > other way of continuing to maintain them. > > NFS tests using the kernel sound like a prime candidate for xfstests. > In the past Yong Sun moved some ext4 related tests from LTP to xfstests. > LTP has various NFS related tests. IMHO more important than where these tests > should be is if anybody has a deeper look into them an cleanup them / rewrite > them from scratch. Although xfstests sounds like a natural choice, atm there are quite a lot NFS tests in LTP. xfstests contain only single NFS test. IMHO it's a choice of anybody who rewrites these tests whether he tries to put them to LTP or into xfstests. If it were me I'd probably keep them in LTP, because I prefer LTP framework capabilities. Kind regards, Petr