On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 10:14:06AM +0000, Filipe Manana wrote: > We do have some tests that fail in any kernel release so far. Some > because the corresponding fixes are not yet merged or some fail often > due to known problems. > Looking at your list of failure, I see some that shouldn't be failing > like btrfs/053. I've sent you the compressed tarfile with the test artifacts under separate cover. The files that you'll probably want to look at first are ./runtests.log and ./syslog. The xfstests results artifacts will be in ./btrfs/results-default/. If you have a wiki page or some other pointer of what tests that you expect to fail, I can put them into a btrfs-specific or file system configuration specific exclude file. For example, see [1] and [2]. [1] https://github.com/tytso/xfstests-bld/blob/master/kvm-xfstests/test-appliance/files/root/fs/ext4/exclude [2] https://github.com/tytso/xfstests-bld/blob/master/kvm-xfstests/test-appliance/files/root/fs/ext4/cfg/bigalloc.exclude I'm planning on running btrfs and xfs tests more frequently to support some $WORK initiatives. So if there are tests which are known failures that would be good for me to suppress, and if there are some file system configurations that would be useful for me to run, please let me know and I'm happy to set them so that gce-xfstests and kvm-xfstests can better test btrfs. Also, I assume you do have some btrfs developers who are regularly running xfstests, so I don't know how helpful this would be to you, but given that I'm going to be running the tests *anyway*, if it would be helpful for me to forward test results to you, or to only send you a note when test regressions show up, I'm happy to do that. Cheers, - Ted
